Your thought experiment is interesting, but I don’t think it applies here. The driver of a school bus would not be expected to get in his back and check the brake lines before every trip. It would be nice if he did, but no one would expect him to.
Should a person who’s handed a gun be expected to always check it for live ammunition? I would think so. But I could see a jury deciding differently, especially since Baldwin could claim he thought the bullets were blanks.
It is a movie industry standard.
When Brandon Lee was killed by a gunfire accident, Hollywood adopted a set of rules that were mandatory for all usage of firearms on any movie set. I have read this list of rules, and if Baldwin had followed the rules, the accident which occurred would not have happened.
One of the rules *REQUIRES* the actor to verify that the gun is safe. He must physically check it to make certain that it is not loaded with real ammunition. He must declare that it is safe in a loud voice so that the rest of the crew can be aware that the gun is safe.
There are a whole set of rules they are required to follow, and they've been posted regarding this topic in the past.
If the trial were in Artesia a person holding a gun would be expected to know if there is live ammunition in it. A jury full of Santa Fe leftists is likely to buy the ignorance argument for Baldwin which is probably why charges were dropped.
I land somewhere in the middle. I have witnessed gun negligences over my lifetime that thankfully never hurt anyone but I would be hesitant to criminalize an accident if they had.