What The Baldwin Mishap Says About Guns Isn’t What You Might Think

The Federalist ^ | October 29, 2021 | Mark Overstreet

[Kaslin]

The right to keep and bear arms is, at a last resort, our most important right, thus it’s one that should be exercised with the utmost care and attention to detail.

---

The investigation into the fatal shooting of movie camerawoman Halyna Hutchins by actor Alec Baldwin with a prop gun on the set of the latter’s movie, “Rust,” last Thursday is ongoing, with new information and speculations appearing daily, so prudent people will let the investigation run its course before reaching conclusions. The fact that Mr. Baldwin has been a hard-core leftist activist, particularly against the right to keep and bear arms, should not lessen conservatives’ self-restraint in this regard.

We have been told several key elements so far. During a rehearsal, Baldwin pointed in Mrs. Hutchins’s direction a single-action revolver that a film crew member had claimed was unloaded. The gun fired, perhaps because Baldwin cocked the hammer prematurely or pulled the trigger unintentionally, something got caught on the trigger, the gun malfunctioned, or Baldwin fired the gun intentionally for rehearsal purposes, thinking it was unloaded—and Hutchins and film director Joel Souza were struck, the latter non-fatally. Also, the same gun may have been used by some film crew members for target shooting with conventional ammunition earlier in the day.

However, as with people’s reactions to many other topics in modern society’s news cycle, in this instance self-restraint against conclusion-jumping is not universal. Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who normally gadflies on topics more within his area of expertise, knee-jerked, “What is needed now is a clear law that categorically prohibits any real gun or real bullet from being used on a film set.”

Of course, no such need has been established. Movies have a good, if not perfect, track record where firearm safety is concerned and, although we should still wait for the results of the investigation, what has been reported thus far suggests, if anything, not that the movie industry’s safety procedures are inadequate, but that they may not have been followed by Baldwin and some members of his crew.

One fact about the tragedy appears to have emerged: an effort to exonerate Baldwin, one of the hard left’s favored Hollywood personalities. Most conspicuously, Democrats and leftwing civilian disarmament activist groups, who would otherwise be using the tragedy as the launchpad for an indignant and self-righteous campaign against the right to keep and bear arms, are being silent.

More subtly, a Fox News article quoted a movie prop master explaining how people in his line of work are responsible for checking firearms before they get into actors’ hands. “If you do enough safety checks along the way, nothing should happen. But, obviously, the gun on Alec Baldwin’s set was not checked. Because if it was, they would have seen the bullet in there,” he reportedly said.

Another Fox News article stated that “a camera operator who was working on the film’s set [the day of the tragedy] noted to detectives that Baldwin was very careful when it came to the use of prop firearms while filming prior to the tragic accident,” and “the actor observed all the safety protocols and even did an extra check-in with the crew to make sure no one was near him. Specifically, he made sure a child who was on set that day wasn’t anywhere near him when discharging the weapon.”

However, whatever the movie industry’s protocols may be, in the firearm training world it’s universally understood that once a person takes a gun into his or her hands, he or she is responsible for it. And while the cameraman Fox quoted may be correct that Baldwin was safe previously, it wouldn’t necessarily mean that he was without fault in Hutchins’s death.

Furthermore, in the firearm training world, the Baldwin incident would not be considered an “accident”—a mishap that occurs despite someone doing everything correctly. Unless someone deliberately loaded the gun with conventional ammunition, knowing it would be fired by Baldwin in that condition—which at this point there is no publicly known reason to suspect—the tragedy was the result of “negligence”—something that occurred because one or more people failed to follow safety rules and procedures.

There’s A Reason to Always Follow the Rules

Leading voices among firearm instructors, their organizations, and the firearm industry commonly advise many safety rules. Some apply to all firearms, some to certain types of firearms because of how they function mechanically, and others to certain situations, such as training classes, shooting competitions, and the making of movies. Furthermore, several rules are widely considered cardinal and may be relevant in this instance.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), which has thousands of certified instructors nationwide, has long advised three safety rules that apply to all firearms at all times. The military, which trains almost as many Americans annually as NRA instructors do, uses basic firearm safety rules that track with the first two of the NRA’s rules.

The NRA’s first rule is “Always keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.” Normally that means, among other things, “not at another person.” Its meaning and purpose is so obvious that even someone with no experience handling firearms can understand it.

It’s often described as the most important rule, on the reasoning that even if someone failed to follow every other rule, and as a result fired a gun unintentionally, if that person were pointing the gun in a safe direction at the time the gun fired, he or she might be embarrassed and would almost certainly be read the Riot Act by the range safety officer at a shooting range, but no one would have been hurt.

The NRA’s second and third rules are “Always keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot” and “Always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use,” the intents of which are also easy for almost anyone to understand.

Whether the intents of these rules were violated in Baldwin’s instance would depend on whether the scene he was rehearsing called for him to fire the gun (loaded with blank ammunition, of course) in the direction of Hutchins’s camera with her manning the camera, whether crew members in the chain of custody of Baldwin’s gun inspected the gun according to movie industry safety protocols, and whether there was any lapse, even for a moment, in that chain of custody.

Regular Training Reduces Risk

People who train seriously with firearms load, unload, and otherwise handle firearms so frequently that they must adhere to safety rules religiously, lest Murphy’s Law force a mishap. In training and competition events, participants are frequently required to unload firearms while observed by supervisory personnel, and go through various steps to demonstrate beyond any doubt that their guns are unloaded.

Serious gun owners don’t follow safety rules only most of the time, or when they feel like it, or when someone else is looking, or when they’re not in a hurry, or when they’re not distracted. They do things correctly each and every time. This is because doing things the safe way is more safe, and because by doing things correctly every time, they program themselves to do those things even if tired or distracted.

No one is born knowing how to handle firearms safely. Liking guns is not the same as knowing how to handle them. Even having owned guns for many years, and having shot guns many times, is not proof of knowing how to handle firearms correctly. The right to keep and bear arms is, at a last resort, our most important right, thus it’s one that should be exercised with the utmost care and attention to detail.

[HYPOCRACY]

Mishap? No need to read.

[Carl Vehse]

If the Demonicrats and Enemedia can use the killing of Halyna Hutchins to weaken or destroy the Second Amendment, they’ll throw Baldwin under the bus without a second thought.

[Yo-Yo]

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who normally gadflies on topics more within his area of expertise, knee-jerked, “What is needed now is a clear law that categorically prohibits any real gun or real bullet from being used on a film set.”

If we banned real helicopters from movie sets, Vic Morrow might still be alive.

What a stupid solution to a human error problem.

[JusPasenThru]

Maybe you should. It’s a good article.

[jimbug]

Notice that from the beginning of this tragedy the use of the phrase “prop gun”. My guess is that this was a fully-functioning revolver, probably a replica and possibly an authentic period piece that was used that fired live ammo. The fact that it was a ‘prop’ on a movie set does not discredit its functionality.

[nickcarraway]

I think all children should have firearms education. This in this incident only makes me think that more.

[.44 Special]

What a piece of tripe!

[Seruzawa]

I noted that earlier. They use the term “prop” gun to try to lessen the responsibility of Baldwin and the crew. It was not any special sort of gun. It was a generic Colt Peacemaker clone. People might think that a prop gun is some sort of special weapon and that therefore this was just a tragic accident. Nope. It was a real gun. And Baldwin and the Armorer are criminally negligent. They are lucky they have a Soros Prosecutor to help them out. That and the special dispensation that actors and movie companies seem to get from LEs.

[gloryblaze]

I recently had occasion to drive with a good friend in the passenger seat, who had not ridden with me at the wheel before before. At every stop, she announced “It’s clear.” Well, I told her to sit back straight so I could see for myself. There are just some times when one can’t take someone else’s word.

[Lisbon1940]

Says Chekhov was right about Act 1 and Act 3.

[Avalon Memories]

This is the type of revolver used by Baldwin in the fatal incident. It is a Colt 45 long barrel replica.

It's so easy to check the cylinder and barrel of a revolver to see if it's loaded and, if yes, with what type of cartridges. There is zero excuse why Baldwin did not take literally a minute to check the firearm. Although others in the gun's chain of custody were also negligent, as the last person to handle the gun and only person to fire it, Baldwin bears the lion's share of responsibility. Also, if that set was as undisciplined as has been reported, Baldwin bears responsibility as a producer, meaning management.

[Who is John Galt?]

If we banned real helicopters from movie sets, Vic Morrow might still be alive.
What a stupid solution to a human error problem.

Probably should ban real cars, while they're at it - numerous professional drivers have been killed or crippled doing movie stunts. Oh, and ban electricity on movie sets also, to prevent electrocutions...

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

“That firearm was a F.lli Pietta long Colt 45 revolver,”

https://www.koat.com/article/gun-used-rust-movie-santa-fe-alec-baldwin-safety-halyna-hutchins-deadly-shooting-tragic-albuquerque/38085703

[bobbo666]

“inspection follow its course” means it will be ignored after a few weeks. Like Smollett.
Yeah, I know the trial is on-going. So what? He’s black and a friend of the Obama’s. Nothing will happen.

[precisionshootist]

"Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who normally gadflies on topics more within his area of expertise, knee-jerked, “What is needed now is a clear law that categorically prohibits any real gun or real bullet from being used on a film set.”"

This is a perfect example of why liberals should NEVER be in charge of anything. Following his advice would eventually lead to no movies being made at all. In fact why not just ban movies outright. So many people die making them in all sorts of accidents. Just ban them. Books are much safer. Well we need to specify what books are safe and ban all the others.

Leftists are the problem, always.

[precisionshootist]

"It's so easy to check the cylinder and barrel of a revolver to see if it's loaded and, if yes, with what type of cartridges."

Please stop with this stuff. Safety with firearms on a movie set has little to do with gun safety in the real world. The truth be known even most pontificating firearms instructors have little to no knowledge of movie industry modified firearms and the highly specialized blanks that are used in filming. The best live fire instructors in the country would not know where to begin trying to keep actors safe on a Hollywood action film set and still be able to make a movie.

Can you imagine a set armorer handing a revolver loaded with blanks and waiting for Jessica Alba to check the condition and check the loading is of proper blank ammunition? What about an MP5 SMG? This would only introduce more danger.

Thousands of movies have been made with countless uses of real firearms while accidents have been extremely rare. In fact Hollywoods safety record with firearms on movie sets is far better than real shooters and live ranges.

2nd amendment supporters in my opinion would be far better off not commenting on this incident and letting the investigation play out.

[Graybeard58]

Negligent manslaughter, case closed.

[Graybeard58]

I recently had occasion to drive with a good friend in the passenger seat, who had not ridden with me at the wheel before before. At every stop, she announced “It’s clear.” Well, I told her to sit back straight so I could see for myself. There are just some times when one can’t take someone else’s word.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Major pet peeve! I absolutely hate it when a passenger says that. If I get creamed in an accident I want it to be either the other drivers fault or my own, not a passenger in my car.

[Robert357]

A good article, but it didn’t emphasize a few things it should have.

First, what happened was a negligent discharge. There was no accident.

Second, a very important firearm safety rule is to assume all firearms are loaded and how you should transfer a firearm from your possession to that of another person. Anytime you hand a firearm to someone, you should open the action to insure that the firearm is unloaded. You should then make sure that the person receiving the firearm also inspects it.

Lastly, the person receiving a firearm should examine it to insure it is loaded with the correct ammunition.

Ideally, the single action revolver would have been handed to Baldwin in an unloaded condition. Then blank ammo would have been handed to him. Alternately he should have at least witnessed it being loaded with “blanks.”