[Political Junkie Too]

However, I do believe Dershowitz is correct when he states that, going forward, legal measures must be in place to ensure that gun safety protocols are followed.

Aren't there already legal penalties in place?

There is no "actor's exception," is there? Wouldn't the same penalties that apply in one's home when a child is accidentally killed also apply on a movie set when a crew member is killed?

The fact that the movie industry has voluntarily developed its own procedures for handling guns safely doesn't prevent the law from applying when those procedures are violated.

When a child is killed in the home, nobody wonders whether there is enough evidence to charge the parent or not. So why does the question arise if there is enough evidence to charge the actor who held the gun and was witnessed pulling the trigger?

A parent would clearly not intend to shoot their child, and the actor would clearly not intend to shoot the crew member. That doesn't let the actor off the hook for the crew member's death on the set, just as it doesn't let the parent off the hook for their child's death in the home.

-PJ

[lowbridge]

“There is no “actor’s exception,” is there?”

Yes there is. It’s called the rich and famous exception. Extra credit if one is a liberal.

Precedent was set in 1987 when John Landis, among others, was found not guilty of manslaughter for the deaths of Vic Morrow and two child actors on the set of the movie the twilight zone.

[wbarmy]

and the actor would clearly not intend to shoot the crew member

That might be an unfounded assumption.

There is always an investigation and the suspect is investigated for any possible motive. As we all know, Baldwin is famous for his anger management issues and there is a chance he might have been angry at them and decided to scare them.

[1Old Pro]

There is no "actor's exception," is there?

Not yet.