• @grue
      link
      English
      -171 day ago

      Not shooting his coworkers, for starters.

      Also, IIRC he was the producer or something as well as an actor, so he was the firearms handler’s boss and ultimately in charge of everything including on-set safety to begin with.

      • @Plastic_Ramses
        link
        English
        371 day ago

        As an actor in the same movie hes not allowed to adjust weaponry on set or his whole production would be uninsurable.

        The weaponmaster is where the buck stops.

        • RedC
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -241 day ago

          As a producer in the same movie he also has a duty to make sure the weapon master knows what they’re doing. Again I’m not saying he’s the only one responsible, but to me the buck stops with the guy who pulled the trigger.

          • @Plastic_Ramses
            link
            English
            30
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            It doesnt matter what you think.

            On set heirarchy exists for a reason and that reason has resulted in only two gun related deaths since 1993 despite being the mostly widely used weapon in all of cinema.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            420 hours ago

            Well yeah, he did. The person is a credentialed expert, and he delegated all responsibilities to that person.

    • RedC
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -151 day ago

      What exactly do you mean? He’s an actor. My point is that that doesn’t absolve you of firearm safety

      • @Dkarma
        link
        English
        22
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Yes but his point is that Baldwin wasn’t responsible for firearms safety on the set at all he was just an actor the armorer is the one who’s responsible. Just like the person who hires the Hitman is responsible for the death, the person who is the armorer on the set is responsible for this person’s death.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1323 hours ago

        Rule #1 of firearms safety is to not point a gun at anything you don’t want to shoot.

        How the fuck would that work in a movie, exactly?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          Lots and lots of cuts, lol. Green screen everything. In an action scene, every single actor must be in completely different room, or shoot their part at different times, then composite everything together. No movies will ever have the weapon pointed at the camera, ever. Such scenes are now banned.

          Also, if any scene involves picking up a weapon, they must cut, the actor must check the weapon, then resume filming after. This must be done on every take.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            020 hours ago

            What’s the actor going to check? How heavy it is? They don’t have a clue.

            If by “check” you mean somebody who is an expert or is informed by experts makes a judgement about the weapon and announces it, that happened.

            Court submissions say assistant director David Halls did not know the gun contained live ammunition, and indicated it was unloaded by shouting “cold gun!”

            The armourer who provided the weapon did receive a manslaughter conviction. It was their responsibility, and they either screwed up or let themselves get bullied into screwing up by the asshat AD.

            It is revealed assistant director David Halls had been sacked from a previous production, war drama Freedom’s Path, over gun safety violations in 2019.

            https://abcnews.go.com/US/rust-assistant-director-david-halls-sentenced-deadly-set/story?id=98268586

            He was sentenced already for negligence.