Lying Gasbag Alec Baldwin Claims Gun Fired Itself.

Certainly it could be he was handed a live weapon by someone with an agenda. However, proper procedure says the first thing you do when you are handed a weapon is prove to yourself that the status of the weapon is safe, verify if it is loaded or unloaded. You do not take anyone's word for it- even if you watched them unload it in front of you. Baldwin lacked understanding and failed proper protocol. That part of it is beyond question in my opinion. The rest should be determined by the investigators.

 

actors and actresses do not unload and reload a gun everytime they are handed a new gun

personally, I think all prop guns should not even be able to take real bullets, they should not be real guns

maybe this will be what causes change in the movie industry

 

Fair enough. How would we be better off "without them amongst the general population," and what specifically does that mean? A total ban? Severe restrictions? No more hunting? No more shooting sports? Cancel the biathlon? Please be specific. Thank you.

Why do you believe there should be no "carry laws" as you suggest?

And yes, I will correct you on that last point - it is illegal to hunt with an automatic weapon already in all 57 sates. In fact, it is extremely difficult (not impossible) for civilian to even legally own an automatic weapon - not to mention incredibly expensive. There's a 12-page application w the ATF that takes on average one year to get approved, and there are dozens of disqualifications. If you are lucky enough to get approved, be prepared to spend about $20,00 on the weapon itself. Not to mention you'll blow through $30 -$60 in ammunition in a few seconds. It's an expensive hobby to say the least.

 

George Clooney - who I presume has a little more experience acting than you do - disagrees.

I agree with you here. CGI can replicate the muzzle flash and report. I think, however, the true thespians would argue that it is impossible to mimic the actual recoil and therefore they need blanks so that they get the experience of actual recoil and the physical dynamics thereof.

Alec Baldwin's lies will probably not help.

 

this is what Cloony said - he was talking about an unloaded gun, not one loaded with blanks

"“Every single time I’m handed a gun on a set — every time — they hand me a gun, I look at it, I open it, I show it to the person I’m pointing it to, we show it to the crew,” he told Maron."

Something obviously went wrong, but what I most want to know is who put the real bullet in that gun, it was all blanks except one real bullet, why?

that is why I say Baldwin is civilly liable, this was not criminal on his part, but if someone tried to sabotage the set, that would be criminal

 

Regardless, Baldwin, like the cop in his tweet, knows what it is like to kill someone,
https://nypost.com/2021/10/22/alec-baldwin-haunted-over-old-tweet-about-fatal-cop-shooting/

 

I spent my 20s and early 30s in Canada - so that very much influences my views on guns. I don't see a need for the general public to own them. I would feel much safer (as I did in Canada) without people carrying guns in public.

I don't want to debate Rittenhouse - so please lets not go there. But I believe that his having a gun is what brought on the attack on him. Had he been just like anyone else, milling through the crowd, no one would be dead now. We wouldn't have gone through a costly trial. He didn't need to have a gun. Did he have a right to? Sure. But it is MY OPINION that his carrying one (and not concealed, certainly) is the reason he found himself on trial for murder/manslaughter.

 

Certainly anyone who would handle a gun on set should be taught the protocol and required to follow it.
The fact you are an actor doesn't exempt you.

Part of the status of these guns is that often bullets and loading are shown in a film, and the front view of the revolver shows the tip of the projectile, pretty well identifying it.
Regardless, safety standards could and should have prevented this. Many things wrong. Unfortunately for Baldwin, the failure to follow them left him as the responsible person.
For what, the investigators will determine.

 

I can't agree to that. Everything on the set is a prop. There is no such thing as an unloaded firearm. Even if someone placed a gun in front of you with a contract signed in blood saying it is unloaded, it is still loaded.

Basic firearm safety means a gun on a table with no one near the trigger should not be pointed in a direction where a discharge can harm someone.

Baldwins profound levels of ignorance is common with the anti-gun crowd.

 

1) So because of the way she was dressed she was asking for it? A bold strategy to take.
2) He was initially attacked by arsonists for putting out fires that the arsonists were setting , not for having a gun. YOUR OPINION as you call it, is demonstrably wrong.

 

excuses excuses and and they damn well should check it. Again, if you are using guns as part of your job you damn well ought to famiarize your self with proceedures, and protocols. And how they work.

 

There is no such thing as an unloaded gun. Even Clooney of all people understands this. As much as I despise its anti-gun positions, I applaud the seriousness with which it takes firearm safety. Too bad Baldwin never got this message. There'd be one less dead cinematographer.

 

Agree. If anyone is require to handle a weapon for whatever reason......... even in a stage production.or ???........... one should learn the safety rules

His anti gun stance has nothing to do with that......... as he was handling a weapon and should know how. .........


What I found concerning from that interview........is that he seems to think he is not responsible. He killed someone......he IS responsible. for that. (his behavior) How it will be LEGALLY interpreted is to be seen. And that is anyone's guess..

 

They should. It is a thirty second procedure.

 

I'd feel safer with violent felons locked away in prison long enough until they can no longer be a threat to innocent people. CC licensees are the single least criminal demographic in our society - that is across all socioeconomic, gender, racial, ethnic, national origin, linguistic, geographic, or other lines of demarcation.

But you just did.

You acknowledge that this is speculation and that there is no factual basis for your position.

Ah, the fallacy of dependent trials. Again, no factual basis for this speculative argument. How far do you want to take this? Remember what I said up-thread about violent felons? I could argue that if Jacob Blake -- a violent felon allowed to walk our streets instead of being in prison where he belongs -- had never beat up his girlfriend, he never would have pulled that knife on the police and no one would be dead now.

Again, blame Mr. Blake. And that ridiculous idiot of a prosecutor who never should have filed charges to begin with, and who demonstrated he did not even know the laws of the state he is sworn to uphold.


He is actually violating the law in this picture.

The anarchists and felons of Panty-Fa and Black Lies Matter didn't need to burn Kenosha. Jacob Blake didn't need to beat up his girlfriend. The girlfriend didn't need to do such a piss-poor job of selecting a male sperm donor to impregnate her. Again, we can take correlative and causal semantics back to the Big Bang.

The reason he found himself on trial is because the idiot in the picture above muzzle-sweeping a courtroom with an uncleared weapon WITH A ****ING FINGER ON THE TRIGGER wanted to make a name for itself in woke SJW circles and cares so little for the law it doesn't even bother to know what the actual law is when it takes a teenager to trial for such a painfully-obvious instance of self-defense.

 

I can do it in less than ten.

 

1) I don't see the comparison at all. But you do, as is your right.
2) You could well be right, but the videos I saw had him no where near a fire. I saw him walking down the street and attacked. But if I'm wrong, I'm happy to admit it.

 

When I said I didn't want to debate Rittenhouse, I meant that I didn't want to go into the innocent vs. guilty aspect. He was found innocent by a jury - story over. I was using him as an example, not debating whether he had the right to have the gun or use it.

With respect to everything else, you will see that I didn't present anything as fact. I am offering my view, my opinion. In that way, it cannot be 'incorrect'. It is my opinion, not a statement of fact which can be disproved.

 

He was found not guilty. People are not found 'innocent.' And again, this was a foregone conclusion. Charges should never have been filed.

An opinion most certainly can be wrong - if it cannot be substantiated by objective fact. You state it is your opinion, for example, that "nobody would be dead" if K.R. "didn't have a gun." Because you can not prove this factually, it has no merit. It is meaningless speculation. What is the basis for your wrong opinion? Facts? No. Feels? Seems so. Admit I'm speculating.

 

I probably do my 45ACP 1911 in less than ten seconds. I drop the magazine, pull back the slide and check the chamber and then point it towards the ground and pull the trigger.

If they were checking a revolver, they would have to remove all rounds to assure that they are not live and reinsert them which would take a bit longer.

 

People have been saying that KR would have been killed himself had he not been armed. I have asked more than one member here how many unarmed people were killed that night. The answer - although none have provided it - is none. My opinion was based upon that.

I think we've hashed this to death, don't you?

 

Baldwin's mouth is telling lies all by itself too.

 

Where, again, your opinion is wrong. Self-defense is predicated on the notion that you must be able to clearly articulate reasonable fear of imminent death, GBH, or sexual assault. Armed or unarmed does not factor into the calculus.

You brought it up. Back on topic, Alec Baldwin's recklessness and ignorance of firearm safety and functions killed somebody.[/QUOTE]

 

disagree, you hire an expert to handle the safety of the guns, they should be safe, or why hire them

 

or hire an expert to make sure they are safe to use as props