Alec Baldwin, armorer charged with involuntary
manslaughter in fatal ‘Rust’ shooting
of Halyna Hutchins
New York Post,
by
Gabrielle Fonrouge
Original Article
Posted By: Black Conservative Voice,
1/19/2023 11:59:04 AM
Alec Baldwin will be criminally charged in connection with the “Rust” shooting that left cinematographer Halyna Hutchins dead, prosecutors said Thursday.
New Mexico prosecutors will charge Baldwin and armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed with two federal counts of involuntary manslaughter over the death of Hutchins on the “Rust” film set in October 2021, when a real bullet was loaded into a prop gun.
Assistant director David Halls, who handed Baldwin the loaded gun, accepted a misdemeanor charge in a plea deal.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Mizz Fixxit 1/19/2023 12:12:50 PM (No. 1382396)
Baldwin pointed a revolver in an unsafe direction and pulled the trigger. He deserves the felony charge.
48 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
GeaugaDog 1/19/2023 12:17:13 PM (No. 1382403)
A revolver has a half back position. If you draw back the hammer before it reaches half way back and you release the hammer it will strike the bullet primer with enough force to discharge the weapon. That's what happened. Still guilty.
20 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
BarryNo 1/19/2023 12:17:16 PM (No. 1382404)
I heard part of the reason the armorers people went on strike was due to unarmed someones firing live ammo out of the prop guns - violating union rules. Name this person.
20 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
BarryNo 1/19/2023 12:18:18 PM (No. 1382405)
Un-named, not unarmed.
how do phone spell checks do this crap?
13 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
lynngirl122 1/19/2023 12:26:44 PM (No. 1382412)
About damn time.
20 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
DVC 1/19/2023 12:30:52 PM (No. 1382417)
I don't see that it was the armorer's fault. She was put in an impossible position, required to be at other locations and they were not supposed to be using guns without her present to manage safety. She didn't have the authority that she required.....and that was on the producer who defined her job responsibilities.
I put that split responsibility for her, and the decision to go ahead and handle guns without the armorer present on the producer's head.
Who is the producer? Baldwin.
Two hats.....producer, and trigger puller.
I put it ALL on Baldwin.
But the armorer should have quit the movie over the dual responsibility. But, it was her first movie, and she probably was too worried about "never working again" sort of stuff. Bad choice by her.
28 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
udanja99 1/19/2023 12:36:38 PM (No. 1382420)
If this isn’t karma, I don’t know what is. Baldwin has been a HUGE jackass for decades and now he gets to pay the price. I don’t even like popcorn but I may need to go buy some.
22 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
DVC 1/19/2023 12:39:02 PM (No. 1382423)
Re #2. You are incorrect. The halfcock position is designed to be where there is NOT enough energy in the hammer, if it slips at that point, to fire the cartridge. Multiple YouTube sleuths have used a "same maker, same model" handgun and tested that theory repeatedly. None of them got the cartridges to fire.
The hammer had to be beyond the halfcock notch to have enough energy for the hammer to fire the cartridge, and if the hammer had slipped when farther back than the halfcock notch....the halfcock notch would have caught the hammer....which is precisely what it is put there to do. And, if the hammer is caught in the halfcock notch....pulling the trigger does NOT drop it. Nothing happens.
Only if the hammer is beyond the halfcock notch AND the trigger is pulled can the hammer fall with enough energy to fire the cartridge.
The mechanical design of these old guns, and modern replicas, aren't as idiot resistant as modern guns, but they had thought through the basics of safety and if you keep your finger off of the trigger, the gun cannot fire unless parts inside are broken or modified. Since we have heard nothing of the "broken or modified" parts, and I am sure someone has opened up the revolver and checked, it can safely be assumed to be in normal working condition.
That means two things happened......hammer pulled back beyond the halfcock notch, AND trigger pulled. It cannot happen any other way, regardless of what Baldwin says.
And ultimately....pointing any gun at a person is a SERIOUS safety violation. It is done in movies but normally only under the extremely close handling and eye and CONTROL of an armorer.
Baldwin short circuited all of that...HIMSELF.
31 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
MrDeplorable 1/19/2023 12:39:39 PM (No. 1382424)
#2, if you look at the way a revolver works, you see that when you pull back the hammer, the "cylinder hand" --a little projection--makes the cylinder revolve to bring the round into battery to be fired, meaning if you pull the hammer back to half-back position only, the round is not in battery and cannot be fired.
12 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
obdurate 1/19/2023 12:44:36 PM (No. 1382428)
Thrill kill? asking for a friend.....
5 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Grateful 1/19/2023 12:52:17 PM (No. 1382437)
Looking forward to seeing the perp walk and the wrist jewelry.. Schadenfreude!
13 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Encore 1/19/2023 1:02:16 PM (No. 1382446)
Ridiculous! Maximum 18 months? And $5,000 fine? Some soft judge will deem he’s paid enough through stress give him zilch. Effing joke!
18 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Dodge Boy 1/19/2023 1:22:23 PM (No. 1382466)
He was just now charged? My, what took so long?
16 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
zoidberg 1/19/2023 1:47:37 PM (No. 1382477)
You are worthless, Alec Baldwin
You are worthless, Alec Baldwin
You failed in every way and now my stock in you has fallen.
Your career is stalling and you're worthless, Alec Baldwin
8 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
jayjeti 1/19/2023 1:52:25 PM (No. 1382484)
It's more the fault of whoever provided the loaded gun than it is for Alec Baldwin. When he would do actual filming he would be pointing the gun at people and pulling the trigger.
1 person likes this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
Starlifter Nav 1/19/2023 1:59:54 PM (No. 1382491)
I'm not impressed with the reportage. If the quotes used were correct, no one on that set - including the investigating law enforcement offi ers- seems to be very knowledgeable about firearms.
I've never heard any knowledgeable person refer to a revolver's cylinder as a "drum" or any component of a cartridge ( this was not a "cap and ball" firearm) as a "cap". And the visual characteristics of a blank round (crimped) and a live round ( with a prijectile)
3 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Starlifter Nav 1/19/2023 2:01:09 PM (No. 1382493)
Projectile. I hate this phone.
4 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
RayLRiv 1/19/2023 2:18:05 PM (No. 1382504)
I don't feel sorry for him.
Be a man Alec. Face up to your actions.
7 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
DVC 1/19/2023 3:08:34 PM (No. 1382544)
One other confusion factor that is not discussed often. This is a bit technical, but if you want to understand the complexities of this....here's another point not in the media.
In any revolver, when looking at the gun from the front, you can see the bullets in the cartridges by looking into the front of the cylinder. You cannot see the cylinder chamber aligned with the barrel, but you can see several on either side. As a gun guy, I pay attention to things like this and have seen MANY old western movies where you can clearly see bullets in the cylinder....and I mean the correct usage....the bullet is the projectile, the entire cartridge is NOT a "bullet", regardless of massive misuse of the term.
If there are blanks, you can see that the bullets are not visible, so the gun looks "unauthentic", looks
unloaded. Or possibly you can see the crimped end of a blank, either way....wrong for the movie.
In any case.....the point is that on a movie set, if they want authenticity, there must be dummy cartridges which LOOK like live cartridges and do not look like blanks, which are visually different -- no bullet, and often made of plastic and/or with a crimped end. So, when an actor is shown loading a gun.....the visual difference between blanks and real (looking) ammo is apparent, so dummy cartridges must be used, which LOOK, at least on screen, like live cartridges, during at least some scenest.
So, there IS A NEED on a set for cartridges which APPEAR to be live, but are dummies. Now - no having worked as an armorer, I don't know exactly how they mark the cartridges to tell a dummy. In MOST ordinary uses, like gunsmithing or training, when dummy cartridges are needed, they are either red solid aluminum facsimiles, or sometimes, if needed to test functioning and feeding of a gun, they are physically made of a real cartridge case and real bullet, no primer, no powder, and typically a couple of obvious holes are drilled through the case. The US military uses tinned (dull silver color) dummy cases, for the rifle cases, they have obvious longitudinal dents AND holes to make it very clear that this is a dummy cartridge. This is a safety issue.
None of these super obvious methods of identifying dummy cartridges would be useful on a set where an actor must be seen to be loading a gun, and the cartridges must LOOK real, at least from a few feet away. Do they have no primers? Well, since western actors often wear a bunch of dummies in gun belt loops....where the missing primers would be obvious....no, they must have something that LOOKS like a primer, yet be still "dead" and also somehow visibly be able to be distinguished from a real, live cartridge upon closer inspection. How exactly do they do this? I don't know.
It would be normal for dummy cartridges and blank cartridges to be on the set. Blanks for actually "shooting" and dummies for appearances. BUT when some live ammo somehow made it onto the set, then you have a VERY, VERY dangerous situation because the live ammo and "visually good" dummies can be pretty easily mistaken by non-experts. I assume that there is some marking that distinguishes the "visually good" dummies upon closer inspection....but non-experts may well have no clue about this.
The armorer should have walked off of that set when she lost ABSOLUTE control of the guns, as in ALWAYS In a locked safe, with her only having access, and ONLY out when she was present and totally in charge. When she was forced into the dual role - the stage was set for disaster.
And I bet that 'visually good' dummy cartridges was a key player in this disaster. Is it possible that the supplier of the "visually good" dummy cartridges mixed in a live cartridge? Is it possible that some person, intentionally or accidentally put a live round into a box of "visually good" dummy cartridges?
Lots of questions that haven't even been asked by the know nothing reporters.
8 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
Strike3 1/19/2023 3:13:34 PM (No. 1382553)
So Baldwin has officially been declared stupid as well as unlikeable. I concur.
5 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
davew 1/19/2023 3:19:37 PM (No. 1382559)
Baldwin may be the biggest jerk on the planet but unless he is also the person who loaded the live round in the prop gun, he is just one of the victims of the real perpetrator. No professional set would fail to maintain control of the loading of a prop weapon especially since the blanks have a ball bearing inside the cartridge rather than gunpowder. He may be getting sentenced for political or labor relations reasons but he is not guilty of negligence for a crime someone else committed.
2 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
Gordon Freeman 1/19/2023 3:22:00 PM (No. 1382561)
I see no reason to have live ammunition anywhere near the movie set.
6 people like this.
Reply 23 - Posted by:
Omen55 1/19/2023 3:32:44 PM (No. 1382566)
It will be interesting 2C if Alec takes the stand.
4 people like this.
Reply 24 - Posted by:
nelsonted1 1/19/2023 3:49:29 PM (No. 1382576)
We practice with dummy rounds often, almost constantly. We Always! Drill holes through the sides and In the back we drill A much bigger hole where the primer would be fitted and usually paint or die the whole case with red or green. Then, be so paranoid, we check and recheck because one can't take back a bullet flying off somewhere.
Why couldn't they have put bullets in the chambers without a case so the bullets would show for filming while filling the case with white toilet paper or something else colored so anyone opening the car gate and looking into each cylinder can see empty?
This whole story is so bazaar I can't get around it. One could rack the whole thing to a series of screw ups one on another but I can't get past the saying: "Every gun is loaded until you check it"
I really fell for the flunkies in all this but Baldwin, the final check since he pulled the trigger, not one bit.
3 people like this.
Reply 25 - Posted by:
jntsrgn 1/19/2023 4:01:48 PM (No. 1382583)
Why was there live ammo on a movie set? Who brought the live ammo to a movie set? Who loaded the firearm with live ammo? I have never seen any answers to these questions.
4 people like this.
Reply 26 - Posted by:
bighambone 1/19/2023 4:23:11 PM (No. 1382588)
Chances are Baldwin will wimp out through some sort of deal where he will never serve any time.
3 people like this.
Reply 27 - Posted by:
Hermit_Crab 1/19/2023 5:33:44 PM (No. 1382626)
Hmm.
Surprisingly, Soros must not like Alec Baldwin.
(The D.A. works for Soros, NOT the people of Santa Fe County)
1 person likes this.
Reply 28 - Posted by:
udanja99 1/19/2023 6:48:45 PM (No. 1382681)
#12, the national news is reporting that he could serve five years. But that’s still not nearly enough.
2 people like this.
Reply 29 - Posted by:
DVC 1/19/2023 7:19:39 PM (No. 1382707)
Re 324, there needs to be something to hold the bullet in place....a cartridge case, otherwise the bullet will just fall out if tipped up or fall back where isn't visible if tipped up. Got to have visually good looking dummies.....but also there needs to be SUPER control, which was lost.
1 person likes this.
Reply 30 - Posted by:
LoneVoice 1/19/2023 7:51:38 PM (No. 1382720)
What is the world coming to when a famous leftist actor like Alec Baldwin can’t get away with shooting his cinematographer and wounding his director on a movie set? The woman’s husband said he didn’t blame Alec and they’re still good friends. (Nothing suspicious there. Am I right?)
Alec said that he didn’t fire the gun and I believe him (ignore my eyes rolling to the back of my head)
In the normal world a firearm is always considered loaded and anyone handling the firearm is responsible for the consequences of handling that firearm.
In Hollywood Land actors are expected to take someone else’s word for that the weapon is safe.
I’m sure Alec is completely surprised by this indictment.
I know I’m surprised.
1 person likes this.
Reply 31 - Posted by:
mifla 1/20/2023 8:06:13 AM (No. 1383003)
Be interesting to see jury selection, if it goes that far. While it is not the all liberal all the time DC jury pool, the state is blue. I suspect a plea deal will be offered, but Baldwin is stubborn and arrogant. He may demand that it go to trial.
0 people like this.
Reply 32 - Posted by:
dwa 1/20/2023 11:26:07 AM (No. 1383220)
Baldwin will get off while armorer will be convicted.
0 people like this.
Reply 33 - Posted by:
Faithfully 1/20/2023 7:52:14 PM (No. 1383574)
As she should be. She handed to gun to another man who handed over the gun to Baldwin shouting: "Cold gun on set."
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Black Conservative Voice"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
I love how people try to claim “the gun just went off” when any gun owner knows that is nearly impossible.