Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fwdude
I'm of the minority opinion here that the charges against Baldwin should be dropped.

The armorer Hanna Gutierrez Reed, on the other hand, may be, and I repeat MAY be liable for criminal negligence if it turns out that she did allow live ammunition to be used in the prop gun on a prior day, and she failed to properly clear it.

Keeping the firearms on set save was her responsibility, not Baldwin's. (As an actor. As a producer I'm sure he still has some civil liability for what occurred on his production.)

9 posted on 04/20/2023 12:37:53 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /Sarc tag really necessary? Pray for President Biden: Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Yo-Yo

“save”? Try “safe.”


12 posted on 04/20/2023 12:38:58 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (Is the /Sarc tag really necessary? Pray for President Biden: Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

“Keeping the firearms on set save was her responsibility, not Baldwin’s.”

I hope you don’t own a gun. It is always the responsibility of the person to check the gun (not to rely on anyone else) and to never point a gun at someone unless you plan on shooting them.

And yes 99% in movies the pointing of guns at someone is movie magic (split screens or scene transfers), not real. And in the case that of the 1% it is the guns are not real. He should have never allow a real gun to be used on set.

The only reason he stuck to real guns is because the actors and director was using them recreationally. That’s why the gun was loaded.


22 posted on 04/20/2023 12:45:09 PM PDT by BushCountry (A properly cast vote (1 day voting) can save you $3.00 a gallon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

She is liable, there is no maybe.

She is responsible for approving the safety of every weapon on set, thats the definition of her job. Shes the armorer. Thats what they are hired to do. There is no maybe.

Alec is definitely liable as a producer who jointly ran the company that hired her.


24 posted on 04/20/2023 12:47:41 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

They want Baldwin charged for personal animus, and call it miscarriage of justice. There’s a chain of custody, and the actor has every reason to believe the prop is safe. You’re right, as a producer, he or his production company is going to get bent over in a civil suit, especially if he’s the one who hired Hannah.


26 posted on 04/20/2023 12:49:45 PM PDT by Mr. Blond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

The law says that you are responsible for the gun that is in your hand. It doesn’t matter what somebody tells you when they are handling a gun.

He was supposed to go through the steps of opening the barrel and checking the chambers and and everything to make certain that what he is told, in terms of safety, is what the situation.

Being executive producer, that was doubly his job. The responsibility of the EP is to go through all the checklists that need to be checked off that day to make certain that all is well and good.


40 posted on 04/20/2023 12:58:28 PM PDT by Jonty30 (Black widow spiders aren't the only species that eats their mate after finishing with them. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

You have a solid point in my opinion too.


47 posted on 04/20/2023 1:08:27 PM PDT by DesertRhino (Dogs are called man's best friend. Moslems hate dogs. Add it up..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

Sorry, but there is no such thing as a SAFE firearm.

Even prop firearms when perfectly handled do fire wadding, which at close range can be lethal.

I agree that he could not have known there was live round in the chamber, but he still pulled the trigger with the gun pointed at someone.

He was NOT directed to fire the gun, they were NOT filming at the time. The gun did not “Just go off”...

He engaged in negligent behavior, that killed someone. For him to face absolutely no charges at all is disgusting. No I am not saying he should be locked away for life, but to say he did NOTHING wrong is not true.


61 posted on 04/20/2023 1:21:42 PM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

He picked up a gun, didn’t check to see if it was loaded, pointed it at a person, and pulled the trigger. All intentional acts. How is this not a crime.


90 posted on 04/20/2023 1:58:38 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard ( Resist the narrative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

I still wonder about the “if” factor, i.e. “if” Baldwin was filming a gun-in-his-mouth suicide scene that fateful day; would he have checked the weapon, or not?


107 posted on 04/20/2023 2:23:27 PM PDT by Clutch Martin ("The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

I tend to agree.


116 posted on 04/20/2023 3:14:18 PM PDT by VTenigma (Conspiracy theory is the new "spoiler alert")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Yo-Yo

Yeah, I agree you.

The armorer loaded the gun. She should be able to tell if a round is real or a dummy.

The question not answered yet is how live rounds got into the box of dummy rounds.


123 posted on 04/20/2023 6:17:10 PM PDT by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson