Wait he was handed live gun, which was supposed to fire blanks and yet it's him getting charged and not the propmaster. what the fuck? what am I missing?

[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 33 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So, there is a part where he's an executive producer and may have ignored warnings regarding safety.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Anything to a Wikipedia article on the incident it was the armorer that had previous experience with accidental discharges of firearms and I guess it's the mere point of their presence during filming to make sure all guns are handled safely. Their job was to hand a safe gun to the actor, they didn't do it and a person died. I don't fucking see one reason to charge the actor, regardless of whether they happen to be a producer or not, and not charge the person actually responsible for the accident.

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 28 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He was the armorer’s boss, and the producer, so it was his job to make sure everything was as required. He failed his responsibilities, someone died. It’s pretty simple.

[–] RandomStickman@kbin.social 29 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's maddening the amount of people deflecting responsibility off of him. If a workplace safety incident happened, and the boss has cultivated the lax culture against safety AND is involved with said incident, but he's not responsible? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 10 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Tbh, my first reaction was that it wasn’t fair; then I read more details as they were reported and had a moment of clarity. People get comfortable and mess up, it happens. This time, it cost someone their life.

For those worried about Alec, he has plenty of money. His ego and wallet will take a hit, but he’s not going to prison. He may or not be in a mental prison, but he can afford quality therapy, so if he is and chooses to stay there, that’s on him.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Literally no one is worried about him as a driving force bud, if you think thats the concern or topic of discussion you should probably sit it out

[–] Maeve@kbin.social -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Then why are people whinging about poor Alex refusing to take his rightful responsibility, like adults and poor people are expected to do?

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 0 points 10 months ago

Because its not actually clear who is guilty of the death, the producer who hired an incompetent firearm safety coordinator or the incompetent firearm safety coordinator.

Fucking obviously, you child.

[–] RandomStickman@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I went on exactly the same path as you and I only read about it when I came across the articles casually browsing, I didn't actively seek them out.

There are people that knew more and are still defending him, which is wild.

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I hear you. He can still be a decent person who made a serious mistake due to gross negligence. I’m not saying he is or isn’t decent; I like s lot of past things he said, and I hope this was a wake up call for all of us: If we’re coasting too long on good reputation/intention/feelings, we’re going to get hard reminders to actually continue working to be better than we were, yesterday.

edited

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I'm basing what I say on the Wikipedia article and the two years old Legal Eagle video, but it seems it wasn't his negligence, but rather the armorer's and the assistant producer's:

According to a search warrant, the guns were briefly checked by armorer Gutierrez-Reed, before assistant director Halls took the Pietta revolver from the prop cart and handed it to Baldwin.[39][40] In a subsequent affidavit, Halls said the safety protocol regarding this firearm was such that Halls would open the loading gate of the revolver and rotate the cylinder to expose the chambers so he could inspect them himself. According to the affidavit, Halls said he did not check all cylinder chambers, but he recalled seeing three rounds in the cylinder at the time. (After the shooting, Halls said in the affidavit, Gutierrez-Reed retrieved the weapon and opened it, and Halls said that he saw four rounds which were plainly blanks, and one which could have been the remaining shell of a discharged live round.)[41] In the warrant, it is further stated that Halls announced the term "cold gun", meaning that it was empty.[39] Halls's lawyer, Lisa Torraco, later sought to assert that he did not take the gun off the cart and hand it to Baldwin as reported, but when pressed by a reporter to be clear, she refused to repeat that assertion

Btw, holy fucking shit I hate lawyers

[–] Maeve@kbin.social -1 points 10 months ago

He was the boss of all bosses. That’s the point. The buck stopped with him. Either he’s boss material or he’s not. Having money alone doesn’t give you the skill. The skill would be accepting responsibility, stop pointing fingers, accepting legal and financial consequences.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Perhaps because Baldwin, as far as we know, did everything correctly? He had the armorer prepare the gun and assistant producer check it. The armorer failed to do it correctly and the assistant producer failed at their part of the job. They are guilty of the accident, because they did not follow the procedure required, not the person who gave them the task

[–] RandomStickman@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No one is absolving responsibility from the armourer.

But if I'm the boss of a warehouse, never enforce any OSHA safety standards against my staff, and one of them just signed off that they inspected the forklift that day without actually doing so, and I drove the forklift and killed someone because of the forklift's malfunction, I am, as the boss, partly responsible for the incident.

To say otherwise is flying against rules and regulations written in blood, as we can clearly see.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How does this even apply to the situation?

[–] RandomStickman@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Baldwin is one of the producer (boss), who did not enforce any safety standards (allowed crews to bring live ammo to the set, allowed armourer to be subpar), and ended up with one of his staff dead.

If you don't know how my analogy applies to the situation you clearly don't know enough about it to form an informed opinion.

ALL workplace safety standards should be the responsibility of the boss in some capacity. That's how safety standards are maintained. If the boss is allowed to shrug it off saying "it's not my fault the staff is an idiot" that's how we end up with new hires dying on the line. If you can't understand that I could only hope you aren't in charge of anyone's safety.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info -2 points 10 months ago

who did not enforce any safety standards (allowed crews to bring live ammo to the set, allowed armourer to be subpar), and ended up with one of his staff dead.

And you're basing these two claims on?

[–] hades@lemm.ee -3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

From my own standpoint I can understand how a certain amount of responsibility lies on him too. If I were handed something that looks like a gun or a knife, I would probably check to make sure it isn't a real gun myself.

Especially in the US, where tragic accidental gun-related deaths and injuries happen every day.

[–] UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago

Your argument stops being valid the moment you said probably

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 1 points 10 months ago

If you hired a professional armorer to handle guns safely and then have had assistant producer check it and confirm the gun is safe then I imagine you would have assumed it actually is.

[+] mp3@lemmy.ca -8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The armorer trial was pushed back to Feb 21st of this year.

And even though it's a prop, it should still be handled as if it was loaded at all time, not point it at anyone unless necessary, etc.

It may not entirely be his fault, but he was still careless.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It has to be someone's job to make sure guns on set are safe

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Of course the armorer's job, but safety comes in layers. It's in a way everyone's job to apply basic precautions, especially when you're handling one.

Treat all guns as loaded to minimize the potential for harm.

[–] nudnyekscentryk@szmer.info -1 points 10 months ago

Exactly. Safety comes in layers and therefore assistant producer David Halls was supposed to double check the gun after the armorer prepared it. He failed at it, the armorer failed at their job and it's theirs and only theirs fault.

[–] heckypecky@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 10 months ago

And someone's job is to control that this person does their job properly. Which is the someone's boss who delegated the task.

In other words, an executive who assigns a task to someone is responsible to ensure it is done properly.