Alec Baldwin, who accidentally killed his cinematographer on the set of his film “Rust,” should have never pointed a gun at another human, even if he believed it was safe, Hollywood safety experts told The Post.
And the actor is now likely to face a gantlet of legal challenges — including possible criminal charges — as both the man who pulled the trigger and as the executive producer responsible for set safety, legal experts said.
“Loaded or unloaded, a weapon never gets pointed at another human being,” Hollywood firearms consultant Bryan Carpenter of Dark Thirty Film Services told The Post.
Baldwin, 63, fired a prop gun that killed Halyna Hutchins, 42, and injured the film’s director, Joel Souza, on the “Rust” set in Santa Fe, NM, on Thursday.
For safety, all live firearms used in TV and film productions are typically aimed at a dummy point, not at equipment, cast or crew, Carpenter noted. Guns, he said, are never aimed at a person.
“You never let the muzzle of a weapon cover something you don’t intend to destroy,” said Carpenter, whose New Orleans-based firm has worked on the sets of scores of TV and film productions. “All guns are always loaded. Even if they are not, treat them as if they are.”
Former filmmaker and former US National Shooting Team member Peter Lake put the blame on Baldwin.
“The buck stops with Alec Baldwin on every level,” he told The Post. “It looks very bad for him. At least the captain of the Titanic had the good sense to go down with the ship.”
Baldwin was told it was safe to use the prop gun minutes before he fired the round that fatally struck Hutchins, a warrant application from the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office says.
At the time, Hutchins was behind a camera operator’s monitor, looking over the operator’s shoulders, a source close to the crew told The Los Angeles Times, and Souza was behind them.
Crew had “yet to retreat” to the video village — an area set up for crew — to watch “from a distance,” the paper reported.
Assistant Director Dave Halls didn’t know the firearm had a live round in it, announcing it was a “cold gun” when he gave it to Baldwin, the court papers say.
Still, Baldwin may face serious legal trouble, possibly including negligent manslaughter, Joseph Costa, an attorney with Costa Law in Los Angeles, told The Post.
“As an executive producer you are in a position of control and you can get prosecuted criminally,” he said. “It’s the equivalent of drinking and driving, meaning someone may not have intended to cause great harm but they do.”
New Mexico criminal attorney Erlinda Johnson, a former state and federal prosecutor, said the actor faces possible criminal liability for involuntary manslaughter.
“All the state needs to demonstrate is that he was engaged in a lawful, but dangerous act and did not act with due caution,” she said.
“That’s what the state has to prove for involuntary manslaughter, which is a fourth-degree felony with a maximum penalty of up to 18 months in prison.”
She speculated that Baldwin may argue that someone handed him the gun, “but then, well, it was incumbent upon him, since he was handling the gun, to make sure there were no rounds.”
“Clearly someone didn’t do their due diligence,” she said. “They should have been checking those guns to make sure there were no live rounds.”
LA defense attorney Denise Bohdan predicted that “anyone running that set will be sued.”
“Yes, Alec Baldwin was the main producer, but it might be found out that another producer did more to cut corners. I don’t think there will be anything as bad as a murder charge, but this is going to be a legal nightmare for Baldwin,” she said.
The production was reportedly troubled over its firearms and general safety on the set.
The prop gun had misfired twice on Oct. 16 and once the week before, according to the LA Times, and union workers said the set was plagued by safety issues, prompting them to walk out in the hours ahead of Thursday’s tragic shooting.
Experts also claimed that live ammo should never have been on the set to begin with.
“I can’t think of any reason there would be a live round anywhere on set,” Lake said.
“They are generally prohibited from movie sets. There is no explanation I can think of why there would be a live round in a gun on set. You certainly wouldn’t have it in the hands of an actor.”
—
Original Article: https://nypost.com/2021/10/23/baldwin-ignored-no-1-rule-of-gun-safety-hollywood-weapons-expert/
Peter Lake put the blame on Baldwin: “The buck stops with Alec Baldwin on every level,” he told The Post. “It looks very bad for him. At least the captain of the Titanic had the good sense to go down with the ship.”
Surely Peter Lake is not suggesting that Alec Baldwin needs to DIE over this? This is just click bait.
Who brought the live ammunition onto the movie set and why?
Baldwin is a complete jerk off
Yes, rules for proper handling of firearms include that you always assume it is loaded, and you never point it at someone or something you don’t plan to shoot. However, technically, this alleged prop handgun was not supposed to be a firearm. I’ve aimed cap guns, toy guns, and rubber band guns at various people and objects when I was young, and my father, an avid gun owner and hunter, never admonished me for doing so. Why? Because he and I both knew these were not firearms. If a prop gun actually meets the definition of a prop, it cannot also meet the definition of a firearm. Mr. Baldwin knew this gun was a prop, and was told it was a prop, and therefore not a firearm, so he violated no rules for the proper handling of a firearm.
Beyond everything else, I don’t understand why live ammunition and a “prop gun” were ever on the same set. Why was there ever live ammunition in a “prop gun”?
If you pick up a weapon ALLWAYS CLEAR IT to ensure that it is safe. 1 remove the magazine, 2 open the breach to ensure there is no round loaded, 3 aim it at the floor (or roof) and pull the trigger to be double sure. Only then, is it MAYBE safe, but not safe enough to point at anybody.