Scott Reeder, the head of props on “Walker,” the TV revival about a gun-toting Texas Ranger, was planning for a scene in which a woman points a revolver at a captive when a new set of orders arrived: real guns would no longer be used in the production.
It was shortly after a cinematographer had been fatally shot on the set of the film “Rust” in New Mexico, when a gun Alec Baldwin had been rehearsing with fired a live bullet. The mood around guns on the “Walker” set had become tentative, and its producers had decided that they would stop using real firearms — which they, like many other productions, had selectively used for some close-ups and on a few occasions for blank fire — and would start relying fully on replica guns, including rubber guns and gas-powered guns such as Airsofts.
“I took any conventional weapon that we had off the prop truck and locked it in the safe,” Reeder recalled.
In the two years since the “Rust” shooting took the life of the cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, a divide has emerged in Hollywood over the use of real firearms on film and TV sets. Some productions, like “Walker,” have moved to ban them, leaning more heavily on special effects that replicate the flashes and bangs of gunfire. Many other productions continue to use them — maintaining that real guns look more convincing and elicit more authentic reactions from actors when used to fire blanks, and arguing that the “Rust” tragedy was an anomaly that could have been avoided if the production had followed standard safety protocols.
“Using blank fire enhances the story’s narrative; it provides realism and gives the actors something to respond to,” said John Navarro, a veteran armorer who oversaw blank fire in “Killers of the Flower Moon.” “And if used properly, it’s utterly safe.”
why would you have live ammo on a movie set?
Because they were fools who were screwing around during down time in violation of standard movie set protocol. Then they violated standard shooting range protocol and didn’t clear their weapons after. Then Baldwin violated further movie/shooting protocol by pointing a gun in someone’s direction and pulled the trigger.
Like most mishaps, it was an error chain where breaking one link could have prevented the tragedy.
I suspect that there is another factor in play in the Rust incident as well as a police-sponsored case where a cop shot a participating member of the public – a woman – with a presumed blank.
It’s my understanding that some “wad-cutter” rounds are difficult to distinguish from a blank. The bullet is flat-headed and recessed into the case deeply. (Forgive me if I am ill-informed, I have little reloading experience.) If this is the case, it’s not hard for someone who has wad-cutter rounds to fail to distinguish them from blanks.
It is a rare case that a given individual – or institutional armory – to have both blanks and wad-cutters. So, in the history of firearms, this mistake might have occurred just these two times. But the history of safety manuals is written in blood.
Such incidents do disproportional damage to the cause of gun-rights. They give the gun-controllers the pretext to assert that only highly qualified, trained professionals should have guns. In the face of the fact that these two incidents were in the hands of a cop and a professional armorer. It is precisely these professionals most vulnerable to complacency.
If we, the PotG – maybe through the auspices of SAMMI – adopted a protocol to mark blank rounds with a distinctive color or a distinctive faux-“bullet”, then no one handling blank rounds would fail to recognize a live round (e.g., a wad-cutter) from a blank.
Our problem as an affinity group is that we refuse to recognize opportunities to do something that would protect our public image.
Not a lot of blank ammo is produced. It wouldn’t be costly for the industry to run anodizing production runs on a few cases of brass to mark it for use in producing blanks. Or, for sale to reloaders who create their own blanks. Pick some arbitrary color – purple, for example – that is unlikely to be an obvious choice for some other purpose. (e.g., red for “hot-loads” or “green” for environmentally sensitive hunters).
Somebody has to have a still better idea than that which occurred to me.
But we won’t do it. We refuse to recognize something that would be in our own PR interest.
MPA, I agree with you in principle.
But I must point out the weak link. People.
Four very simple rules. Yet these NDs happen. Why?
People don’t look; they don’t safety check a pistol when handling it. You can tell a blank from a wadcutter visually.
Making it a different color will only extend the theatre of safety. You could have had neon orange colored cartridges in the SAA that Baldwin fired to kill the photographer and it wouldn’t have mattered. Why? He never looked for himself. Same for the asst. director that handed him the pistol.
Safety is not a destination. It is an ongoing proposition.
I think coloring blank cartridges serves as a false end on a journey that has no end.
I do applaud your concern and opinion.
You can come up with whatever precautions you like, ultimately they will all depend on people doing the due diligence and verifying that things are as they should be. That’s what went wrong in the Rust set- multiple people screwed up.
Normally, real-looking prop ammo has the powder replaced with a few BBs, you verify that it’s prop ammo by shaking it and listening for the rattle. Blank loads used in real firearms (not blank-firing replicas) are visually distinct from live rounds, usually the tips are crimped and there is no projectile, google will show you pictures if you want to see for yourself.
I have seen molds to home cast wadcutters that are flush with the case. I have never seen such a round in the wild, Even among reloaders and bullet casters. I have never seen a commercially made round like that. Not saying they don’t exist, but they are certainly not common.
VERY few fall into the “we” class of your WE won’t do it.
I teach rifle markslmanship to groups of all ages, sizes, experience, and walks of life. Our rules are simple.. only four.
After each course of fire we instructors walk the line carefully che king every weapon to assure they are all EMPTY )bore flag in place precludes any round being in place), bolts locked back, safety physically engaged. Our organisation have had hiundreds of thousands on the firing line over the years, and NOT ONE incident involvig a weapin being dicharged when it should not be.WE are not to blame for one incident. Because WE are all on duty all the time.
I’ve been involved in some video prodution, and know bit about how things run on a live set. Yes time is a valualbe and fleeting commodity. No matter. LIFE is far more precious than time.
I cannot imagine myself being in the position in which Baldwin was when he pckec up that revolver from the propmaster, looked at it “he claims” and declared it safe. Had that been ME going onto the set as I handed that pistol, I certainly would have casually and “idly” out of “curiosity” opened the cylinder, checked how many cases were showing rearward, then inverted it and checked to see what was on the “business end” of each of those rchambered “items”. I may have gone so far as to have ejected the rounds and handled them physically, replacing them once I was assured they were indeed blanks.
Better yet, I’d insidt on, myself, remving the six rounds from the box clearly marked blank/dummy (per the script for that next scene) and examined them myself, then and ONL then inserting them into the now-empty cylinder. It would have taken, what, half a minute exrra? NO film scheduls is so insanely tight that could not be done.
Now, because one sloppy careless arrogant idiot FAILED to carefully check, the entire indusry is now marked as “dangerous”, hours of precious set time will now be taken up in needless “precaustions” and the reality of some scenes will now be compromised needlessly.
All becaue ONE eedjit was too rushed, careless, arrogant, haughty, to have taken a few seconds to MAKE DAMN CERTAIN and in so failing ended someone else’s life.
Mark these words,, even with all the new “precautions” t some point somene else will be hurt or killed. People tend to thin that since “protocols’ are now in place, the protocols will fix things so we no longer have to be vigilant. OR responsible.
Well we ALL MUST be both, always.
Blank round or normal ammo, if you shoot someone in a vital area with a blank or live round from a real firearm at close range, like across the table, someone is likely going to the hospital or morgue.
It’s a total, negligent breach of long-established protocols to point an actual firearm at anything you are not trying to destroy. In this vein, it’s also ignorant to allow those who have no experience with, or know little-to-nothing about firearms to handle or point anything that resembles one at another. I’d draw the lines after their index finger…
just stamp a “b” on the primer before you chamber the round.
There’s only five rules for crying out loud. You have to break two of them to hurt somebody. Any actor or actress that uses a firearm on the set and claims to be a professional, should know them better than they know their lines. NO Excuses.
Mandatory firearms training for all prospective cast members. Western movies of the past had actors, who were gun owners and marksmen. It’s little wonder that Clint Eastwood, for example, never shot anybody!
This effect is a microcosm of the whole anti-gun movement where the perpetrator breaks the law and then these idiots propose to pass new laws to supposedly “stop that from ever happening again” even though that new law still can easily be broken by criminal action where, by definition, they break the law. We need enforcement AND appropriate penalties of EXISTING laws, not more new laws that only affect, degrade, and sometimes illegally stomp on Constitutional rights. Just IMHO.
With all due respect, there is an obvious fallacy operating here. Enforcement and appropriate penalties are NOT very effective in discouraging lawless behavior.
An example of efficacy is a remark by Ann Colter. She explained that the laws against homicide are sufficient to inhibit her from strangling Michael Moore to death.
Most of us confine ourselves to driving no more than 5 mph over the speed limit because we don’t want to pay for a speeding ticket.
However, the majority of violent criminals are NOT inhibited by the threat of punishment. Enforcement and penalties only inhibit violent behavior – through incapacitation – while the convict is behind bars. Current criminal justice policies are to use a revolving door at the jail/prison to maintain the population incarcerated within the political bounds our legislators can tolerate. In the US, this has essentially removed the influence of incapacitation on criminal behavior.
Since the threat of potential punishment is essentially inoperative in the criminal mind, it is naive to expect that enforcement and appropriate penalties will have an effect. The entire process is so diluted that it ceases to function.
Yes, cops arrest when they have probable cause. This is “enforcement”. Prosecutors refuse to prosecute and plea bargain. Judges refuse to impose long sentences. Legislating ever greater maximum and minimum sentencing requirements are impotent penalties. Prosecutors plea-down charges (e.g., offer strong-armed robbery as a bargain to avoid the minimum penalty of aggravated robbery.) Governors encourage parole boards to release prisoners early. A long rap sheet of arrests is merely a breast of ribbons on a soldier’s uniform in the precincts where violent criminals live.
We will not work our way out of this political situation in the foreseeable future. American voters will not en mass demand that their elected officials (prosecutors, judges, legislators or executives) incapacitate violent criminals.
Our only recourse is to attend personally to our own self-defense. Armor-up our homes and workplaces. Armor ourselves when we venture from our sanctuaries. Apply immediate and persuasive dissuasion to those who dare to attack us.
@MarkPA
Thanks for your “right on” comments.
You ignored half of MrMax’s argument. Then you proceeded to attack a straw man. MrMax didn’t say that appropriate penalties of existing laws would discourage lawless behavior. He said we need enforcement and appropriate penalties of existing laws. He’s right.
You go on to mention the current problems associated with left wing ideology in the justice system. That doesn’t mean that we should give up on the justice system. Anyone who has studied the peak, and subsequent fall, of violent crime in the 90s understands that segregating the bad guys from civilized society actually works. The situation had to become very dire before the bleeding heart liberals agreed that we had to make a change. History repeats itself.
How do we proceed? We should continue to advocate for real justice. We have to understand that we will never get that in certain blue strongholds. We have to make sure we don’t get lazy in red states and districts. We have to focus on turning purple states red. We have to work toward changing the culture in the opposite direction the liberal regime has been pushing us. What will happen then? As they say, people will get what they asked for good and hard. That has a tendency to change hearts and minds.
um, all you have to do is have a production where you aren’t criminally negligent?
I realize that is still being worked through the courts but at the same time leave it to the fbi lab to fuck up the case.
“…leave it to the fbi lab to fuck up the case.”
They were looking after their own (politically), did you seriously expect anything different?
You’re confusing the FBI with the BATF.
The FBI is the most conservative, Republican, right-wing agency in all of government. Always has been, still is, and always will be. I’m not saying I like the FBI — they’re not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree — but they are the most Republican and most conservative.
The BATF is the agency that’s full of left-wing gun-hating hoplophobes.
The BATF is so incompetent that when manufacturers send them a sample of their gun, the BATF sends it back as a shoebox full of loose parts because they don’t know how to reassemble a gun after they disassemble it. The BATF knows about as much about the guns that they’re in charge of (unconstitutionally) regulating as as Alec Baldwin does.
Oh, yoohoo…. one method of staying safe on the set that worked pretty well for the previous hundred years or so was “don’t hire Alec Baldwin.”
…and the reason that didn’t work was that the guy deciding who to hire for Rust was…. Alec Baldwin.
“Movie Industry Still Wrestling With How to Maintain Safety on Sets With Guns After the ‘Rust’ Shooting”
Why still wrestling with it?
Its not rocket science. No live ammo, actual prop guns with plugged chambers/barrels, follow the already existing handling rules in the movie industry and firearm safety rules, have strict chain of custody and handling, have competent armorers… etc… ya know all the things that the movie industry already says are ‘standard practice’ that for some reason were not on the Rust movie set.
Yes, this, exactly!
“A Fistful of Dynamite” was a safe movie, and not because James Coburn exercised “his” explosive safety responsibilities.
“Scarface” was a safe movie, and not because Al Pacino prescribed pharmaceutically safe doses of cocaine.
“The Hunt for Red October” was a safe movie, and not because Sean Connery ran a tight Reactor Safety Program or mastered ocean-floor navigation.
The common element in these (and thousands of other exciting, yet safe movies) was the recognition that good entertainment involves an illusion of danger, but also that the specific properties unique to the real thing are not at all required to sell the illusion effectively. The idea that safety should depend on giving dumbsh!t actors responsibility for anything but pretending to be other people is a non-starter.
“plugged chambers/barrels” Hmmmm.
For a realistic “prop” this solution would enable prop masters to use “real” guns that can’t possibly fire if the chambers barrels or both are plugged.
But there is still the argument that the realism of the sound and muzzle flash create realism would be unsatisfied.
I remember toy guns from my childhood that had a pin through the barrels. Why this might have been worthwhile I have no idea.
I wonder what experts would have to say about pinning – with multiple pins – the barrels of “real” guns for use with blanks.
If a blank is loaded in such a gun I wonder if the discharge would pass the pins harmlessly. Allowing for the desired realism.
However, if a live-round were inadvertently loaded and fired, the pin(s) would inhibit the forward motion of the lead bullet with catastrophic effect on the gun, its operator and anyone in the immediate vicinity.
The actor who failed to take responsibility for the loading condition of his prop would suffer the consequences.
In the Rust case, negligent participants on the set would have injured themselves in their off-hours target practice using such pinned guns. In the case of the cop who shot the public participant woman, he would have been injured for his negligence and the woman would have been spared serious injury as the more probable outcome then being shot by a bullet.
the barrels and chambers can be plugged in such a manner as to allow certain blanks (which don’t have bullets) to be chambered and fired yet not allow a bullet to pass down the barrel or an actual bullet round to be chambered. the movie industry has been doing this for 50 years.
“But there is still the argument that the realism of the sound and muzzle flash create realism would be unsatisfied.”
That’s only part of the illusion. The recoil impulse effect on the shooter’s hand, arm, etc. is a lot harder to simulate.
One policy that would greatly eliminate the danger would be a requirement that the person(s) getting the guns pointed at them *personally* verify the bore is clear (would have been very helpful in the Brandon Lee ‘The Crow’ tragedy) and that the ammo is fake by the actors themselves shaking each round to hear the ball-bearing ‘rattle’ verifying it is safe.
It was the utter arrogance of the production in general (at all levels) that got that poor woman murdered… 🙁
Wasn’t Brandon Lee killed by the wad in a blank round? That’s hwat I remember hearing at the time.
Brandon Lee, that was weird. Like in the Rust incident, it too was a real gun they called a ‘prop gun’ because it was being used as a prop. Like in the Rust incident, the ‘Lee’ gun (a Smith & Wesson Model 629 .44 Magnum revolver) was a real gun too in proper working order capable of firing real bullets that had not been ‘fixed’ to be an actual prop gun used to fire only blanks. Actual prop guns that are fixed to fire blanks don’t allow any ‘solid’ object (e.g. blank wadding, a bullet, a projectile) to pass down the barrel.
It was not a wad from a blank round. The gun previously had dummy cartridges in it. The dummy cartridges were replaced with blanks which contained a powder charge and the primer but no solid bullet. The dummy rounds were not the actual caliber of the gun and were smaller, one of them managed to get into the barrel and become lodged there. The blanks were the actual caliber, when the trigger was pulled, the cylinder rotated, the hammer dropped on a blank round and when that went off it forced the lodged dummy round out of the barrel effectively firing a ‘bullet’. The gun, like in the Rust incident, was not properly checked and cleared before the blank was fired and the dummy round previously lodged in the barrel was then propelled forward by the blank’s propellant and out of the barrel with almost the same force as if it were an actual bullet, striking Lee in the abdomen at ~12 feet.
Mark N –
There have been publicized accounts of people being killed with the wadding in ‘blanks’.
One in particular the moron put the muzzle at his temple and pulled the trigger saying “It’s only a blank”.
Literally the equivalent of “Hold my beer and watch this…”
And don’t allow staff to use prop guns for target practice and that is where a competent armorer should be involved and doing their job.
“…and that is where a competent armorer should be involved…”
Nepotism burned them on that decision. She is the daughter of an apparently well-respected industry armorer. His career is most likely over, if he still practices… 🙁
The gun Baldwin was using was not a “prop” gun, but a Colt replica, either Pietta or Uberti. That’s why they could be used off hours with live ammo.
And Armorers are ARMORERS, not general hands.
Tragedies will occur when a production hires cheap unexperienced diversity hires.
It’s my impression that the armorer was granted the responsibility but not the authority to do her job. No one among the producers supported her efforts to do her safety job.
It’s not my intention to comment on the efforts she made. Perhaps she was negligent in respect of things that were within her control.
Rather my intention is to point out that it is the captain of the ship who has the critical responsibility for insisting on a police of safety. If he is uncommitted there is little the safety officer can do to overcome this fault.
“It’s my impression that the armorer was granted the responsibility but not the authority to do her job”
In hindsight the armorer should have quit.
“In hindsight the armorer should have quit.”
Disagree.
Her ass should have been fired immediately after the impromptu ‘range session’ with live ammo the day before… 🙁
Nope, it was her responsibility alone. That was her job. If they were putting people at risk by not allowing a professional to properly do their job, then it is the professional’s responsibility to put their foot down or walk. And here we are back at incompetent diversity hires.
“Nope, it was her responsibility alone.”
Disagree. The person holding the gun that fired didn’t verify the ammo was fake by listening for the ‘rattle’ of the ball-bearing in the supposedly fake ammo.
And that’s before his overall responsibility as ‘producer’… 🙁
You can’t expect an actor to be a safety expert with every single thing they’re handling on the set. That’s why they hire experts. It would be nice if everyone made an effort to go above and beyond, but that isn’t the world we live in. As easy as it is to dump on Alec, because of who he is, I’m not even sure we could say it was his responsibility because he was a producer. Notice how many producers are listed on movies now. Sometimes they do that as a different way to structure how they get paid. The sad reality is that if he was the person he seems to hate (a real gun guy) then he would have taken the time to be safe around firearms, and this tragedy wouldn’t have happened.
It wasn’t her responsibility alone. Let’s say (God forbid) you are Alec Baldwin and you were handed a gun on set. You wouldn’t examine it before pulling the trigger?
If you and I were out somewhere and I handed you a gun, you wouldn’t check to see if it’s loaded?
“If you and I were out somewhere and I handed you a gun, you wouldn’t check to see if it’s loaded?”
Out somewhere as in a movie set, and we’re both gun noobs who’s job it is to play pretend? I’m being realistic and honest about the situation. Not everyone is a “gun guy.” We have to remember that. It’s easy to project our own feelings onto others.
Would you throw actors into a real airplane in flight without experts and precautionary measures?
I get what you’re saying but Baldwin bragged about how much he knew about guns. He’s used them plenty in his career, he wasn’t a noob. Regarding noobs, you or anyone here can explain how any pistol works, how to shoot (I don’t mean get someone to shoot well, but learn fundamentals so they can practice) and how to be safe in less than one hour. I need a minimum of 40 hours of flight time before I can get a private pilot license. Understanding firearms is far less complex than understanding how to fly.
If Hollywood insists on gun realism (and that’s a question for them to answer, not me) then it’s imperative that the everyone on the set handling firearms knows the safety basics. Not just the armorer.
“He’s used them plenty in his career, he wasn’t a noob.” Yet he didn’t understand very basic safety procedures, so he may as well have been a noob. Your hypothetical assumes that people know what they’re doing.
Alec comes across as an arrogant douche. That’s probably why he never learned anything (until it was too late). I don’t think we can hold different actors to different standards when it comes to on-set safety procedures, based on their limited previous experiences. As we know, the act of shooting a gun doesn’t make one an expert.
“If Hollywood insists on gun realism (and that’s a question for them to answer, not me) then it’s imperative that the everyone on the set handling firearms knows the safety basics.”
I agree. The on-set expert advisor would be the one teaching them.
There’s new video out of him from a prior day filming. He’s lying on the ground in costume and directs someone to stand on the other side of the camera so that he isn’t shooting towards them.
https://youtu.be/dj8HX9wwN7Y?si=K5ekC17JVFqSRsaJ
“…and arguing that the ‘Rust’ tragedy was an anomaly that could have been avoided if the production had followed standard safety protocols.”
And that argument would be absolutely correct.
i know this is a gun board, filled with those that have tunnel vision.
There is no need for real firearms on a movie set.
I look at the Movie ‘Lone Survivor’ where you can’t tell that felon Mark Wahlberg is using a fake gun. Special effects are so good now real guns are not needed. Many actors can’t legally touch real guns yet they make believe good enough for the audience to be unable to tell the difference.
Flame away…………….
Fair enough. My wife was an actress previously. Still has an inactive SAG card. It’s all pretend but I also believe Markie Mark should have his record striked🙄
“I look at the Movie ‘Lone Survivor’ where you can’t tell that felon Mark Wahlberg is using a fake gun”
100% false. the guns were real, just fixed for prop use so they could not fire real bullets, and some were fixed only to accept special blanks.
True. Most true prop guns are altered to prevent them from chambering a live round.
Alternately, as seen in the Eastwood spaghetti westerns, in some shots that guns will be (apparently) loaded, but when it comes time for shooting, you can usually catch glimpses of empty chambers. The is fairly obvious in the final showdown in “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.”
If what you say is true booger, then why isn’t that POS in prison? A real firearm is not something a felon can touch, possess, use, right? Why is he special in that regard? Does being a raging liberal help him out? Why haven’t they prosecuted the armors on those movie sets for providing a gun to a convicted felon?
That guy is such an anti-gun fanatic, don’t understand why so many defend him. Would love to see him do more time in a cell next to the other anti-gun hypocrite Alex Baldwin.
“If what you say is true booger, then why isn’t that POS in prison?”
Hollywood has a special provision applied by ATF for the purpose of ‘normally prohibited persons’ actors handling real firearms on set – they allow actors convicted of felonys (those which would normally be prohibited persons) that are on set of filming to handle a gun. The ATF and Hollywood exploits a little known provision in the 1965 amendment to the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, where convicted felons can apply to ATF for “relief” from the “disability” of not being able to possess a gun.
It all comes down to how good the post production effects editing is. I have watched more then a few movies where you could tell the firearms were fake (rubber, airsoft or CO2 powered BB guns). Case in point you can clearly see when they stopped using real firearms during the production of The Walking Dead series. Most of the time it is poor quality CGI but sometimes even the best CGI cannot overcome poor acting or directing.
@blood-on-the-risers. Well, that assumption surely makes YOU look like an ass.
An ass by another name still stinks.
“i know this is a gun board, filled with those that have tunnel vision.”
No, TTAG is filled with those who cherish individual rights especially the right to self protection/defense while navigating through the real world of life with the knowledge that a utopia does not exist.
We ignore the argument (not that I agree with it) that the sound and muzzle flash will – in some cases – supply realism that can’t easily be replicated by special effects. And the reaction of the actors on the set can’t be perfectly simulated.
It doesn’t matter whether those who make this argument are right or wrong. If they ARE going to do what they want to do then it’s in everyone’s interest to figure out how to reduce the risk of their accomplishing their goals the way they are going to pursue them.
We will have an easier time achieving our goals (safety and PR) if we muster our resources in figuring out how to help Hollywood do what it is going to do, but that they do it in the safest possible way.
WTF does “fake guns” even mean?
“WTF does ‘fake guns’ even mean?”
in this context of the idiots post..it means he doesn’t know squat.
The incident was more about drug using good time jackasses on set than guns on set
Maybe Hollywood figures it can’t do anything about the drug using good time jackasses so it’ll just after the guns.
“The incident was more about drug using good time jackasses on set than guns on set”
Was the armorer piss-tested post incident?
Was she drug screened as a part of the hiring process?
I’m confused, are there any NON gun toting Texas Rangers? Is there a Mayberry, TX perhaps?
Hahahaha !
Dang it, I must be too old.
Thnx for that Sunday morning snort!
Old One Bullet Fife. What a great entertainer (as was entire cast) !
Here’s an idea. Hollywood is mostly anti gun. Why not simply stop making movies that have guns in them.
Profits. That’s why. Guns make money.
Now is the time for you to keep your mouth shut! Guns in movies and video games guarantee that our culture will rear-up cohort after cohort who are interested by guns.
Those of us who grew up in rural areas are becoming a smaller and smaller proportion of the population. We can’t by ourselves keep alive the tradition of the shooting sports and admiration of gunsmithing. We need the urban cohorts.
Hollywood and graphic artists making video games are the new driving force maintaining the gun culture.
Never interrupt an enemy when you see him making a mistake.
“Guns in movies and video games guarantee that our culture will rear-up cohort after cohort who are interested by guns.”
Damn straight, they are our very best buddies, they and the first-person-shooter video game industry.
Guns right wrongs and get the girl in the end :
“My God, what’s Bond doing?” “I think he’s attempting re-entry…”
Not a problem, Mark. hollywood will not drop that cash cow.
I say it in plain English to miner and dacian. They, very anti gun, are helping to sell guns with every comment they make here. Do they get smart and shut up? No. Our enemies simply are too greedy or stupid to see the truth.
NYT sounding the alarm and actually giving a number to the amount of gun laws (450) that are currently on the chopping block due to Bruen.
Everyone making a suggestion on how to “improve safety” in the film industry which was pretty safe with their firearms usage for a century is basically defending Alec Baldwin’s behavior. The industry’s safety procedures were not the problem, this specific set was the problem, and the problem probably traces solely to the shooter himself.
Baldwin killed somebody, and I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if he did it on purpose.
I am perplexed about why anyone would use a real gun that is capable of firing real ammunition as a prop gun. Keep in mind that the actors are often violating some of if not all four laws of gun safety. The only excuse is the presumption that no live ammo will be loaded in the firearm.
As consumers of entertainment, we have no problem pretending that phasers, lasers and blasters are real. The visual effects are adequate for our entertainment. Why do we expect much less demand that real, firearms are utilized in movies?
The risks incurred are stupid and unnecessary . Semiautomatic weapons require a blank firing adapter to cycle properly which renders them incapable of firing a full caliber projectile down the barrel. Revolvers can also be retrofitted with a custom cylinder that has a restriction. The restriction not only enhances the visual and auditory effects of blanks, it will prevent the firing of a full caliber projectile.
Keep in mind that these safety measures will result in catastrophic failure of the firearm if live ammo is loaded. While death will be highly unlikely, the actor pulling the trigger will likely suffer some injuries to their hands. This would motivate the actors to carefully check their weapons.
If one takes the time to go to the SAG (Screen Actors Guild) web site and check what they have to say about firearms safety – there’s four different ‘sections’ that address it
One of them starts out to the effect: “You are the final check for the safety of yourself and your fellow actors.”
If someone is handing you a firearm and says “It’s safe” or “It’s unloaded”, do you believe them? Neither do I. All actors should be taught, and then demonstrate, that they know how to clear the weapon they will be carrying/using.
(On the boardwalk outside the Crystal Palace. Virgil Earp passed me the shotgun used in the reenactment, muzzles towards the sky. I kept that alignment and opened it. Two ‘thumps’ on the boardwalk. Chamber inserts to allow the 12G to fire 45LC blanks. No damage done.)
have waited in the line at the handgun cuinter of major gun shops, wanting to see/handle a certain model to check fir etc. The clerk will comea ling, I’ll say I’d like to see” that one. He retrieves it from the display case, opene=s the cyluder/draws the slide, makes a careful visual check of the chamber and mg, then places it flat on the little mat in the counter. I then ppci it u, open the cylinder/rack the slide and drop the mag make MY careful check, THEN I will proceed to handle theweapin check fit feel, trigger, natural pointing ,etc, and when I am done place it back on the mat, not pointed at any possible target.
These clerks apprecite that conduct. So do I.
Had Baldwin lost enough of his arrogance/”da MAN” mindset to have done what I do, that woman would yet be alive today and thse with enough jingle to drop would be sitting and waching Rust.
NEVER too much caution. When there isn’t enough, people DIE.
Another example. At a Civil War reenactment. A serious photographer was there from Tucson. A Confederate soldier had loaned him a Sharps carbine. “If you have a subject that would look better with a weapon, give them this.” I was in period dress. “Can I take some photos?” “Sure.” “Hold this”, and passed the carbine over. I opened it, pinkie in the chamber, closed it. “Why did you do that?” He got my standard 60 second safety lecture.
I gave him my card. About ten days later I got an email, photographs attached. He was a darn good photographer.
Just wait until they have the tech to use CGI actors in place of real ones. That should be interesting.
I look forward to the day that pack of overpaid leftist celebrities get demonetized and they will have to go to work for a living or starve. I couldn’t happen to a more deserving group of Marxists. I relish the thought of them all needing to go get jobs at Starbucks or waiting tables at the local greasy spoon. . Maybe people.will even stop paying attention to their Marxist anti-gun dribble.too.
‘Unhinged’ media goes into a ‘meltdown’ over Javier Milei’s election victory. (the inflation…a foreshadowing of what bidennomics will do here and has already started, its where Biden copied it from…also listen to his description of the left wing there, its what’s happening here…and make no mistake, if the left wing can fully implement their Marxist ‘socialism’ agenda here they will kill you if you don’t toe their line and submit and they have already threatened it with Bidens threat of using military force against law abiding gun owners to confiscate their guns and his ATF holding kids at gun point to illegally force their parent who has comitted no crime to surrender their FFL.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CQ7u8VoqeE
‘NOT THE BRIGHTEST BULB IN THE BOX’: VP Harris ripped by critic as climate hypocrite.
Remember, it’s never hypocrisy. It’s always hierarchy.
I wonder what she did.
Hollyweird has been making bang-bang shoot-em-ups for well over a century. How many people have been injured, or killed in that time? I’m too lazy to look it up, but the last one I remember off-hand is Vic Morrow. And, the guns didn’t kill him, the helicopter did. This leads me to believe that standard, routine practice on bang-bang sets is probably pretty good. Again, I’m too lazy to look it up, but I just don’t remember reading a new headline every other year that someone was accidentally shot on set.
How about they just add one new rule, to the existing rules and regulations? “There shall be no fȕckwits on the set when firearms (real or replica) are in use.” Alec Baldwin would never have had the chance to fȕck up.
Hire professionals. The end
Exactly Matt. 👍
Think “professionals” are expensive?
Hire an amateur.
Seriously. Pay now, or *really* pay later.
Talked this over several times with friends in the movie gun hire business as an offshoot of their gun shop.
Most of the problems on set seem to have been caused by cost cutting by the production company. As Baldwin was the producer and main actor he is liable.
Numerous examples but the biggest one is the rule of one armourer per scene. They were rehearsing two shots and armourer was at the other location. Major movies will show chief armourer and assistants in the credits.
Using real guns is often done as they are cheaper than fakes in some cases. But an armourer is supposed to check before each use. This comes from the Brandon Lee case in 1993 where an obstruction in the barrel was pushed out by a blank and killed Lee. Not possible when not there.
Baldwin apparently also refused to attend the safety course on gun use claiming he was an expert after using guns on other movies. This again makes him liable as the producer.
The movie “industry” can waste away and expire for all I care. It’s all woke junk and bad comic book serials now… There is nothing worth watching anymore. The actors, producers, and just about everyone else involved are mostly all literal communists today. They are overpaid clowns. I have zero interest in going to a theater and wasting my money in that crap or giving it to that pack of leftist jackels.
They always have to throw at least a little propaganda in there. They can’t help themselves. If you don’t know to look for it, it might not register on a conscious level (I’m not talking about the overtly woke junk). Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.
“arguing that the “Rust” tragedy was an anomaly that could have been avoided if the production had followed standard safety protocols.”
This is at least the third time someone has been killed thanks to hollywood wanting to play with real guns. Each time it was an anomaly that COULD have been prevented. How many more anomalies need to happen? And for what? So actors can have “better responses” to real guns? I’m sure Alec had a moving performance after he blew someone away.
Hollywood treats real guns as if they’re props and sometimes toys. It’s asinine that it continues, particularly given the liberal nature of the sector.