Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: CivilWarBrewing

The person holding the firearm is ALWAYS 100% responsible for the damage done with that firearm.

You can spin it anyway you like; but being an actor, being stupid, being irresponsible, being a jerk, being an asshole, being Alec Baldwin, being any of these things does not remove you from the responsibility of handling and checking a firearm for safety at any time.

Alec Baldwin is one of the VERY VISIBLE point men for the GUN CONTROL LOBBY, you would think that someone in that position would be very aware of the lethal nature of a piece of equipment that was specifically designed to DESTROY A TARGET!


63 posted on 10/27/2021 4:11:31 PM PDT by 5th MEB (Progressives in the open; --- FIRE FOR EFFECT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: 5th MEB
The ENTIRE REASON for having an 'armorer' is to avoid putting the responsibility on the actor!

I do agree with you, in theory. Sounds right. But in the world of movie productions, the armorer has that responsibility.

I think we BOTH agree that NO PROP GUN should ever double as a live-fire gun used for target practice during breaks.

74 posted on 10/27/2021 5:12:32 PM PDT by CivilWarBrewing (Get off my back for my usage of CAPS, especially you snowflake males! MAN UP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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