Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Freudian slippers
Jun 23, 2009
US Goon shocked and appalled to find that world is a dirty, unjust place

Trixie Hardcore posted:

Were they hiding the misfire incidents from Baldwin? I thought the incidents were common knowledge on set but that’s hosed up if they were keeping it secret from him.

I'm sure he was told. If I were working on something that required guns and an armorer and a gun went off by itself, I would take it for granted that the armorer replaced that gun, in the same way I'd take for granted that the sun rose the next morning.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

SilvergunSuperman
Aug 7, 2010

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

He was doing a scab shoot after the camera crew had walked out in protest over, among other things, the previous misfire incidents.

At that point I really don't think anyone can reasonably claim they didn't know there was something wrong.

Yeah that's a super bad look

Splorange
Feb 23, 2011

PinheadSlim posted:

There are some cases, in a handful of cheap modern pistols and antique revolvers. Modern revolvers and reproductions of antiques absolutely do not fire themselves and Alex is 1,000% in denial.

Alex is also engaged in a pr strategy. Well at least between whatever firm he hired and the lawyers, he might actually have to spend some serious cash. As long as no one's at fault right?

The Lone Badger
Sep 24, 2007

PinheadSlim posted:

There are some cases, in a handful of cheap modern pistols and antique revolvers. Modern revolvers and reproductions of antiques absolutely do not fire themselves and Alex is 1,000% in denial.

The only modern firearm known to fire itself is the Remington '700' rifle, and even that requires you to actuate the safety.

Punkinhead
Apr 2, 2015

The Lone Badger posted:

The only modern firearm known to fire itself is the Remington '700' rifle, and even that requires you to actuate the safety.

You should google the Taurus 24/7, they had to settle for millions lol

Colonel Cancer
Sep 26, 2015

Tune into the fireplace channel, you absolute buffoon
The tesla of guns

Rad-daddio
Apr 25, 2017
This is just speculation, but would it be possible to catch the hammer on a single-action revolver on clothing while quick drawing it and cause it to snap back with enough force to fire a round?

That would sort of track with his claim that he didn't pull the trigger, and also the description of the scene the was practicing for.

Schweinhund
Oct 23, 2004

:derp:   :kayak:                                     
Self-firing guns are the future. Stop fearing technology, luddites.

A Wizard of Goatse
Dec 14, 2014

Rad-daddio posted:

This is just speculation, but would it be possible to catch the hammer on a single-action revolver on clothing while quick drawing it and cause it to snap back with enough force to fire a round?

That would sort of track with his claim that he didn't pull the trigger, and also the description of the scene the was practicing for.

Not unless it's been specifically hosed with to turn it into an unsafe murder weapon that goes off whenever anything touches the hammer, no

A significantly worn-out original 1800s revolver without any modern safety features could possibly go off if you cocked it then threw it down on concrete or something hard enough, but I'm pretty sure even noted ultrarich killer Alec Baldwin wouldn't do that to a gun that costs literally a million dollars unless that too was part of his plan to commit the perfect murder

A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Dec 2, 2021

teardrop
Dec 20, 2004

by Pragmatica

PinheadSlim posted:

You should google the Taurus 24/7, they had to settle for millions lol

I have a Taurus .22 which went off once when chambering a bullet (slamfired). Fortunately it was pointed at a target anyway. I don’t use that gun any more

Mozi
Apr 4, 2004

Forms change so fast
Time is moving past
Memory is smoke
Gonna get wider when I die
Nap Ghost
whether he pulled the trigger or not seems pretty inconsequential. if the AD gave him a gun and said cold gun he should have been able to leave it in a room full of children and the worst thing that could happen is they hit each other with it

Rad-daddio
Apr 25, 2017
With all the money they saved on not paying for crew housing, they can budget for all the buses that everyone is getting thrown under.

Nigmaetcetera
Nov 17, 2004

borkborkborkmorkmorkmork-gabbalooins
He probably doesn’t remember pulling the trigger because he didn’t intend to do so, but he definitely did if it fired.

AARD VARKMAN
May 17, 1993
Maybe a bug went through the trigger guard as he was lifting the gun, depressing the trigger? A really heavy bug.

Salt Fish
Sep 11, 2003

Cybernetic Crumb
Its a wild west movie right? Obviously they're using old-timey revolvers and the protagonist is pointing a gun at the camera and pulling back the hammer. "Make my day..." I'm sure you can picture it. Anyway, your thumb slips off the hammer, it slams down, gun goes off without pulling the trigger.

This was such a problem with revolvers that the first ones that fixed the issue used to be called "safety revolvers".



These were invented around 1900 and the feature that prevents the hammer from falling and hitting the firing pin wasn't universal until sometime 1910s or 1920s even.

A wild west film is probably set in 1880s or 1890s? So a proper "replica" wouldn't have the feature. Why that would be the case gently caress if I know, but at least you can imagine a situation where you don't have to pull the trigger to have a revolver go off.

edit: that feature wasn't universal until after WW2 lol.. well turns out it took a while to figure out you shouldn't make a gun that shoots when you drop it.

Salt Fish fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Dec 2, 2021

Rad-daddio
Apr 25, 2017

Salt Fish posted:

Its a wild west movie right? Obviously they're using old-timey revolvers and the protagonist is pointing a gun at the camera and pulling back the hammer. "Make my day..." I'm sure you can picture it. Anyway, your thumb slips off the hammer, it slams down, gun goes off without pulling the trigger.

This was such a problem with revolvers that the first ones that fixed the issue used to be called "safety revolvers".



These were invented around 1900 and the feature that prevents the hammer from falling and hitting the firing pin wasn't universal until sometime 1910s or 1920s even.

A wild west film is probably set in 1880s or 1890s? So a proper "replica" wouldn't have the feature. Why that would be the case gently caress if I know, but at least you can imagine a situation where you don't have to pull the trigger to have a revolver go off.
The good ol days when you could buy a safe revolver and a bike from the same company.

Salt Fish
Sep 11, 2003

Cybernetic Crumb
Also I believe that issues where the hammer falls and causes a triggerless discharge are still very possible with modern revolvers if the bar that blocks the pin is malfunctioning or if they aren't maintained correctly. I would estimate that pulling the hammer all the way back is dangerous unless you are 100% committed to firing a revolver.

BAGS FLY AT NOON
Apr 6, 2011

A Soft Nylon Bag

Aardvark! posted:

Maybe a bug went through the trigger guard as he was lifting the gun, depressing the trigger? A really heavy bug.

I heard that the camerawoman and the director had tried to squash a bug earlier that very same day :thunk:

Haptical Sales Slut
Mar 15, 2010

Age 18 to 49
If a weapon he’s holding fired and he didn’t pull the trigger you’d think the first thing out of his mouth would have been “I didn’t even pull the trigger what the gently caress!?” Over and over. Pretty suspect he only says this weeks later during a prepared interview.

But..

Mozi posted:

whether he pulled the trigger or not seems pretty inconsequential. if the AD gave him a gun and said cold gun he should have been able to leave it in a room full of children and the worst thing that could happen is they hit each other with it

This. It does not matter since the expectation is that it doesn’t shoot anything regardless.

LanceHunter
Nov 12, 2016

Beautiful People Club


Salt Fish posted:

Its a wild west movie right? Obviously they're using old-timey revolvers and the protagonist is pointing a gun at the camera and pulling back the hammer. "Make my day..." I'm sure you can picture it. Anyway, your thumb slips off the hammer, it slams down, gun goes off without pulling the trigger.

This was such a problem with revolvers that the first ones that fixed the issue used to be called "safety revolvers".



These were invented around 1900 and the feature that prevents the hammer from falling and hitting the firing pin wasn't universal until sometime 1910s or 1920s even.

A wild west film is probably set in 1880s or 1890s? So a proper "replica" wouldn't have the feature. Why that would be the case gently caress if I know, but at least you can imagine a situation where you don't have to pull the trigger to have a revolver go off.

edit: that feature wasn't universal until after WW2 lol.. well turns out it took a while to figure out you shouldn't make a gun that shoots when you drop it.

He wasn't doing a "make my day" scene. He was practicing a draw. Quickly grabbing the gun from the holster to point at the camera. It's extremely unlikely he was even paying much attention to where his fingers were in regards to the trigger (since he was told it was a cold gun and they weren't even shooting the scene yet). It's also extremely unlikely that he was consciously pulling the trigger. If he had his finger on the trigger and pulled it reflexively/accidentally during the draw: that's both entirely possible and (barring some footage getting leaked) completely unknowable at this point.

A Wizard of Goatse
Dec 14, 2014

Salt Fish posted:

Its a wild west movie right? Obviously they're using old-timey revolvers and the protagonist is pointing a gun at the camera and pulling back the hammer. "Make my day..." I'm sure you can picture it. Anyway, your thumb slips off the hammer, it slams down, gun goes off without pulling the trigger.

This was such a problem with revolvers that the first ones that fixed the issue used to be called "safety revolvers".



These were invented around 1900 and the feature that prevents the hammer from falling and hitting the firing pin wasn't universal until sometime 1910s or 1920s even.

A wild west film is probably set in 1880s or 1890s? So a proper "replica" wouldn't have the feature. Why that would be the case gently caress if I know, but at least you can imagine a situation where you don't have to pull the trigger to have a revolver go off.

edit: that feature wasn't universal until after WW2 lol.. well turns out it took a while to figure out you shouldn't make a gun that shoots when you drop it.

no

Modern (anything post-1920s) replicas look externally exactly like the originals but have modern trigger safeties, because replica manufacturers are not as stupid as internet theoreticians operating with only the knowledge that whatever Alec Baldwin says must be true. You would have to either have a gunsmith go in there and gently caress up the sear specifically to render the gun unsafe (because again it looks and feels identical until you take it apart) or pay the equivalent of a nice house for an actual 1800s antique that looks about the same as a safe ~$300 replica.

A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Dec 2, 2021

Blotto_Otter
Aug 16, 2013


LanceHunter posted:

He wasn't doing a "make my day" scene. He was practicing a draw. Quickly grabbing the gun from the holster to point at the camera. It's extremely unlikely he was even paying much attention to where his fingers were in regards to the trigger (since he was told it was a cold gun and they weren't even shooting the scene yet). It's also extremely unlikely that he was consciously pulling the trigger. If he had his finger on the trigger and pulled it reflexively/accidentally during the draw: that's both entirely possible and (barring some footage getting leaked) completely unknowable at this point.

For what it's worth, many gun ranges have explicit bans on drawing and shooting from a holster, because it's a safety risk - too many instances of someone practicing a quick-draw, fumbling with their gun, and accidentally squeezing the trigger while it's still pointed at their leg (or someone next to them, if it's crossdraw). It's more likely that Alec accidentally pulled the trigger without realizing it, than it is that the gun randomly went off by itself at the precise moment Alec was executing a maneuver known for people accidentally squeezing the trigger.

Salt Fish
Sep 11, 2003

Cybernetic Crumb

A Wizard of Goatse posted:

no

Modern (anything post-1920s) replicas look externally exactly like the originals but have modern trigger safeties, because replica manufacturers are not as stupid as internet theoreticians operating with only the knowledge that whatever Alec Baldwin says must be true. You would have to either have a gunsmith go in there and gently caress up the sear specifically to render the gun unsafe (because again it looks and feels identical until you take it apart) or pay the equivalent of a nice house for an actual 1800s antique that looks about the same as a safe ~$300 replica.

Hmm.. so you're saying someone would have to really gently caress up to end up with dead director on a filmset? Yes interesting, I'm writing this down.

Rad-daddio
Apr 25, 2017

Salt Fish posted:

Hmm.. so you're saying someone would have to really gently caress up to end up with dead director on a filmset? Yes interesting, I'm writing this down.

To be fair a lot of people would have to gently caress up for this to happen, which is exactly what happened.

Well, three so far but I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to spread the blame across even more people.

FoolyCharged
Oct 11, 2012

Cheating at a raffle? I sentence you to 1 year in jail! No! Two years! Three! Four! Five years! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah!
Somebody call for an ant?

Rad-daddio posted:

To be fair a lot of people would have to gently caress up for this to happen, which is exactly what happened.

Well, three so far but I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to spread the blame across even more people.

That's typically how catastrophic events happen. There is rarely one clear cause, but rather a bunch of opportunities to stop it that were all missed.

A Wizard of Goatse
Dec 14, 2014

that specific scenario would require not a cascade of fuckups but actual malicious intent

the more straightforward"Alec did not pull the trigger" scenario would be that the film crew union hired a sniper to shoot the trigger from a grassy knoll just as he brandished it at his victims

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week

Nuts and Gum posted:

If a weapon he’s holding fired and he didn’t pull the trigger you’d think the first thing out of his mouth would have been “I didn’t even pull the trigger what the gently caress!?” Over and over. Pretty suspect he only says this weeks later during a prepared interview.

I think if I had just shot and killed a person that I'd been working closely with for several months, whether I definitely pulled the trigger or thought the gun had gone off by itself, the first thing out of my mouth would be the contents of my stomach

Bad Purchase
Jun 17, 2019




at the exact moment of the quickdraw our reality came in close alignment with the mirrorverse, allowing the alec who pulled the trigger to trade places with innocent mirror-alec. you can tell because the alec seen on set the day of the shooting had a full beard, and the alec in the recent interview has no beard.

kntfkr
Feb 11, 2019

GOOSE FUCKER
man, what a loving crybaby

Warbadger
Jun 17, 2006

Mozi posted:

whether he pulled the trigger or not seems pretty inconsequential. if the AD gave him a gun and said cold gun he should have been able to leave it in a room full of children and the worst thing that could happen is they hit each other with it

Not true, and definitely would be negligent as gently caress to do that. Normally there is a safety check done to verify the gun is unloaded (or verify what it IS loaded with) before people play cowboy with it. This is normally done in front of the actors and people working on the set so everyone can be certain nobody is going to be shot. This check does not seem to have been performed, despite the previous accidental discharges, and they went ahead and played cowboy anyways.

That's part of at least one of the lawsuits and there's at least one actress who told this exact AD to gently caress right the hell off when he attempted to skip said safety check, so it's apparently not a wholly alien concept to actors to not wave mystery guns around.

Warbadger fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Dec 2, 2021

Mozi
Apr 4, 2004

Forms change so fast
Time is moving past
Memory is smoke
Gonna get wider when I die
Nap Ghost
ok, sure, whatever, if you want to use more words to say 'cold gun' then that's fine

Warbadger
Jun 17, 2006

Mozi posted:

ok, sure, whatever, if you want to use more words to say 'cold gun' then that's fine

More about having somebody (AD, prop master, armorer) unload and check the ammunition, push a rod down the barrel to confirm the barrel and chamber are clear, and display it for everyone on set to see.

Zulily Zoetrope
Jun 1, 2011

Muldoon
I mean the dude said the gun was cold, what, you think that wouldn't be good enough for you, just because there had been two negligent discharges on set already?

Well lah-dee-dah Holly Hindsight

Bad Purchase
Jun 17, 2019




you're thinking about this wrong. after one negligent discharge on set, you know everyone handling a gun is going to be super alert and careful, because they just had a loud wakeup call. and after TWO discharges, they're gonna be putting every little safety detail under the microscope and ensuring that there isn't a single hair out of place. yes, the safest* possible time to handle a gun on set is in the immediate aftermath of two negligent discharges. alec probably never felt more sure about a safe weapon in his entire career.

*well, maybe not as safe as after three, so in a way alec was contributing to enhanced workplace safety when he didn't pull the trigger and accidentally murdered the camerawoman. just think about how seriously they're gonna be taking gun safety now!

A Wizard of Goatse
Dec 14, 2014

Bad Purchase posted:

at the exact moment of the quickdraw our reality came in close alignment with the mirrorverse, allowing the alec who pulled the trigger to trade places with innocent 0mirror-alec. you can tell because the alec seen on set the day of the shooting had a full beard, and the alec in the recent interview has no beard.

Hate when that happens

the holy poopacy
May 16, 2009

hey! check this out
Fun Shoe

Bad Purchase posted:

you're thinking about this wrong. after one negligent discharge on set, you know everyone handling a gun is going to be super alert and careful, because they just had a loud wakeup call. and after TWO discharges, they're gonna be putting every little safety detail under the microscope and ensuring that there isn't a single hair out of place. yes, the safest* possible time to handle a gun on set is in the immediate aftermath of two negligent discharges. alec probably never felt more sure about a safe weapon in his entire career.

*well, maybe not as safe as after three, so in a way alec was contributing to enhanced workplace safety when he didn't pull the trigger and accidentally murdered the camerawoman. just think about how seriously they're gonna be taking gun safety now!

Yeah, there's literally an industrywide outcry and push for new restrictions and requirements for firearms on set. Had Alec Baldwin's gun not mysteriously shot two people, none of that would have happened and crews would still have to put up with all kinds of unsafe practices.

dr_rat
Jun 4, 2001

the holy poopacy posted:

Yeah, there's literally an industrywide outcry and push for new restrictions and requirements for firearms on set. Had Alec Baldwin's gun not mysteriously shot two people, none of that would have happened and crews would still have to put up with all kinds of unsafe practices.

So what your saying is Baldwin is gun Jesus ...or gun Pontius Pilate I guess?

Facebook Aunt
Oct 4, 2008

wiggle wiggle




Mozi posted:

whether he pulled the trigger or not seems pretty inconsequential. if the AD gave him a gun and said cold gun he should have been able to leave it in a room full of children and the worst thing that could happen is they hit each other with it

That is true. OTOH even he said in that interview clip that he would never pull the trigger while a gun is pointed at anyone, so he had learned that bit of gun safety, presumably from the gun safety meetings on this or previous sets. He should also have been taught trigger discipline and not had his finger on the trigger at all until it is time to fire.

FoolyCharged
Oct 11, 2012

Cheating at a raffle? I sentence you to 1 year in jail! No! Two years! Three! Four! Five years! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah!
Somebody call for an ant?

A Wizard of Goatse posted:

that specific scenario would require not a cascade of fuckups but actual malicious intent

the more straightforward"Alec did not pull the trigger" scenario would be that the film crew union hired a sniper to shoot the trigger from a grassy knoll just as he brandished it at his victims

Every scenario requires malicious intent level of gently caress up. Even if we asse Alec did not accidentally handle the gun in such a way that the trigger was pulled and it was some ancient antique without modern features preventing that, nobody would have been shot and died if staff hadn't been bringing live bullets to plink with or if the armorer or ad had actually checked the gun out before Alec got handed it or if the previous gun discharges got any respect or if they hadn't been trying to do a shoot short staffed because a bunch of staff walked out due to that history.

This could have been stopped at a lot of different places. Alec being in denial over carelessly accidentally pulling the trigger is just a part in that.

the holy poopacy posted:

Yeah, there's literally an industrywide outcry and push for new restrictions and requirements for firearms on set. Had Alec Baldwin's gun not mysteriously shot two people, none of that would have happened and crews would still have to put up with all kinds of unsafe practices.

These new regulations banning the already illegal chokehold the officer used to kill that man will surely prevent this tragedy from happening again!

FoolyCharged fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Dec 3, 2021

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Lone Badger
Sep 24, 2007

I believe him that he didn't deliberately pull the trigger, and probably has no memory of the trigger being pulled. But 99% chance that it was.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply