@Eegore,

I have no idea what the regulations say but common sense would be that there is the armourer who has control of the guns at all times. That person is responsible for preparing the guns which means loading the blanks. You say you've seen people not notice, but this is the armourer we're talking about.

Just the already undisputed fact that the gun was handed to Baldwin by Halls, shouldn't even be possible. If it's actually allowed for the armourer to lose control of the gun, then that's insane, and it would mean that anyone in that chain of control could commit a murder. That doesn't make any sense because how could the armourer  take responsibility unless he/she maintained control of device.

And yet because Halls has already admitted he handed off the gun that would imply that it's OK, otherwise someone would have pointed this out and there'd already be arrests.

So it looks like it's the actual regulations that are at fault here, plus of course everyone involved.

"I have no idea what the regulations say but common sense would be that there is the armourer who has control of the guns at all times. That person is responsible for preparing the guns which means loading the blanks. You say you've seen people not notice, but this is the armourer we're talking about."

 Being an armorer doesn't seem to reduce ammunition handling error.  An example is people leaving their kid in a car-seat in the back of a car.  It happens all the time, most never end up hurting a child but we hear once and a while where one dies.  Very few parents think they could ever forget their own child in the back of a car, but data and dead children indicate otherwise.

 It may be less likely an armorer will load the wrong ammunition, but it does happen.  

 As for regulations I don't know what they are.  I'm not sure how in a large production war film one person could personally handle every piece of ammo, so there must be room for assistants at a minimum.  

eau de sauvage wrote on 10/30/21 at 18:49:06:


" ...The only reason this is still a story is because the press is trying to do everything they can to protect their liberal icon Alec Baldwin.  ..."

Ray Charlies could have seen,
the comments,
   on private one sided forums,
   and the majority of the public Press,
are to remove any blame from anybody.

They totally prove that.
The UL Socialistic media wants to, 'absolve' everyone.
Cause 'anybody could have ...',
and nobody is responsible.

We all know the UL DFI FDS Baldwin will be absolved of any responsibility.





As I type this,
watching meet the press,
and the Gov, who is loosing.
He was allow to SPIN,
 encouraged to SPIN,
  given softball questions so he could SPIN.
It was just a FREE Political Ad.
(With the required; 'SLAM the former POTUS')

And Raffensperger was asked leading questions.

Serowbot wrote on 10/31/21 at 08:58:32:


Kinna like,
the multiple Comedians,
who OWNED,  Hillary Clinton,
for 25+ years on SNL ?

Serowbot wrote on 10/31/21 at 08:58:32:


No one watches SNL. What everyone saw were short clips on the news.

Everybody's getting into the spirit now...

Halls told investigators that Gutierrez-Reed had shown the gun to him, but he couldn’t remember if she had spun the drum so that he could check every round to ensure they were all dummy rounds, admitting he should have checked every round.


Halls' saying that he 'couldn't remember' is as good as admitting that he did not check, because having the armourer prove the rounds are blank would be one of those things you don't forget doing because it's the entire point of the exercise.

Like, OK the armourer is giving me the gun and i'm going to hand it to an actor to fire, and I'm going to tell them it's cold because the armourer is going to tell me it's cold, now what is the one single thing that I must make sure I do before I tell someone that it is safe to fire this weapon. So did you check every chamber...'er I can't remember'. Maybe I did, maybe I didn't, I don't focus on details.

I love how everyone these days is 'oh I don't remember'. So now both Guttierez, and Halls have implicated themselves in negligent manslaughter.

It is obvious to me now that Baldwin's responsibility as an actor, not a producer, is, when handed the gun and told 'the gun is cold', he should have said to the assistant director, have you seen every chamber and can you confirm it's cold.

That the gun had a single live round and the rest blanks plus the fact that the live round was in the chamber, leads me to believe that this indeed was meant to cause some sort of catastrophic safety shutdown but not kill anyone because I'm guessing that whoever loaded the live round expected the first shot to be a practice shot of some sort.

"It is obvious to me now that Baldwin's responsibility as an actor, not a producer, is, when handed the gun and told 'the gun is cold', he should have said to the assistant director, have you seen every chamber and can you confirm it's cold."

 This doesn't help the person pulling the trigger.  The only way to know your gun has the appropriate, or no ammunition is to look at it yourself.

Eegore wrote on 11/08/21 at 07:00:19:



This is correct but that was sort of my point. It's not meant to be necessary at all if all the procedures that are already in place, are followed. However it's just another layer that recognises the chain of possession. It's not a failsafe anyone can lie to you but it's still the sort of thing that an individual would want to check.

After researching normal gun handling on set, it's obvious that just about every established gun-on-set protocol was ignored. As I guessed earlier the armourer is the only one who should be handling the guns as well as always being in control of who and when a gun is handed off to an actor for the final take. Heads are going to roll.