Alec Baldwin involved with shooting.

[curtintex]

And I'm sick and fricking tired of you fools making me defend Alec Baldwin. Tastes like a **** sandwich.

[Artos]

Who was responsible for allowing live rounds on the set?? From what I recall when it initially happened was that there was plenty of plinking going on.

[Bucknaked]

So my question is, what is Hollywood doing Now that is Different than Then to stop this BS? I’m positively sure that every so called actor hast to attend a gun safety course annually that includes practical training , disassembly and reassembly of many different firearms, reloading classes where they can actually see what the components are made from and how they are assembled , weight variations from a Hollywood loaded dummy round compared to a live round ( if any at all ) ( SARC). They say they are against firearms but then they make millions of dollars in their movies using them so imo they are extremely responsible for their actions.

[Dale Moser]

Unless someone can prove he had some ill intent, or motive, I think this will come down to “workplace law”. Basically what expectation of competency an actor has from the armorer while on set. They’re all union (Screen Actors Guild) I imagine, so I bet there are complicated workplace laws to sort through.

either way, the armorer should be locked away long time.

[Quackerbox]

That's just a bad analogy. Guy at bar ordered, paid for and believed he received Tonic water with Lime. Little did he know that the bartender put half a bottle of TItos in his drinks before serving him.

As far as being party to crime, don't you have to knowingly be party to that crime. If you and I go into a liquor store for a bottle of hooch and you rob the place, while I'm paying for my MadDog, am I a willing participant because we showed up together? I doubt it.

Again,,,dip**** thought he had a gun filled with dummy rounds, as per SOP, the script, the way things are always done, etc. He wasn't a knowing participant to the crime....errr...accident.

I got news for ya, the bartender is guilty for over serving. He/she can and has been charged for doing so on multiple occasions in the county that you live by. Matter of fact I believe the DA who was over that division is running to for the top dog position over there.

And as for us at the licker store, that has happened before as well and yea, both of us gonna take the ride more than likely. Assuming you know Im a crook and known to carry

For a large corporation runner dude is sure was easy to get you gut hooked with the bartender story

[Quackerbox]

That's a clear-cut crime. Easy to prove. You're really bad at analogies for such a smart dude.

I wasnt analogizing at that point. That was just campfire talk

[Hoggslayer]

And I'm sick and fricking tired of you fools making me defend Alec Baldwin. Tastes like a McRib sandwich.

FIFy

[Quackerbox]

FIFy

you need to use that back button again...oh wait you didnt the last time

Aint no body going to jail on this. Not baldwin and not the actor. Bet on it

[Dale Moser]

And I'm sick and fricking tired of you fools making me defend Alec Baldwin. Tastes like a **** sandwich.

I aint gonna say it....it's too easy...

[PondPopper]

Unless someone can prove he had some ill intent, or motive, I think this will come down to “workplace law”. Basically what expectation of competency an actor has from the armorer while on set. They’re all union (Screen Actors Guild) I imagine, so I bet there are complicated workplace laws to sort through.

either way, the armorer should be locked away long time.

How very asinine, but not surprised.

I'm sure the grand jury that recently handed down Baldwins indictment got it all wrong. After all what do they know..

[Hoggslayer]

you need to use that back button again...oh wait you didnt the last time

Aint no body going to jail on this. Not baldwin and not the actor. Bet on it

I dont think they will either. Just because I dislike a man's political stance, doesn't mean he should rot in hell for an accident.

In order for the murder charge that everyone wants to pin on him to stick, the prosecution will have to prove intent. They can't. Negligence on the armor... maybe.

[tvc184]

And I'm sick and fricking tired of you fools making me defend Alec Baldwin. Tastes like a **** sandwich.

Sometimes the truth sucks.

[Geezy Rider]

Long read but may give a little insight and perspective to the whole situation.
Taken from another website and not my words.

How much trouble is Alec Baldwin in?

Background.

There are three defendants in this particular case. Besides Alec Baldwin there is the Assistant Producer David Halls, and the Armorer/Prop Assistant Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. I am going to address the case about Alec here only. If interested you can certainly ask me about Hannah Gutierrez-Reed. Halls has already taken a deal, will plead guilty and will testify against Alec. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed has, the last I have heard, was still going to trial with Alec. Although I suspect the case will be severed, into two separate trials.

Background:
The RUST movie was pitched, by Alec and others as a low cost production ($7,000,000) that had a high probability of making a nice profit. If the movie ends up being sold to a streaming service it will certainly make well over the $7,000,000 dollar production budget.
Well, the investors did NOT want to end up having to fork out $14,000,000 for a movie promised to cost half as much to make. So, the deal was there would steps taken to ensure a production timeline was met inside the budget.
The production, according to multiple film crew members was “Rushed” and safety suffered. Some crew complained about the long commute, long hours, excessive work-loads, and a lack of required safety meetings.
As a critical selling point movie was to be made fast, and cheap. So that meant no fancy special effects. That meant real looking firearm props. In other words, real firearm replicas that functioned as the original.

(Hannah Gutierrez-Reed with a revolver similar to the one that killed the victim.)
Jobs would be combined to save money. The Armorer was also a “Prop” assistant. Which meant she had other duties not directly related to Firearm safety. What’s worse is there were multiple people handling firearms on set in a careless manner. There were in fact two accidental discharges. While I can’t say specifically, it sure looks like anyone and everyone could pick up a firearm, off a cart when it was needed for something.
As part of the budget constraints Mr. Baldwin signed on as a “Producer” with the following limitations. He could only make creative changes to production that did NOT cost more money. So, while Alec was a Producer, his role was limited.
Alec called for appeared to be impromptu rehearsal during a break in filming. There was a rush to get Alec a “Safe” firearm to rehearse with by the Assistant Producer David Halls.
During this rehearsal, the shooting occurred when Alec used a “Cross Draw” to retrieve and point a gun at the camera. The weapon in fact discharged a “Live” round (Bullet) that killed Cinematographer Halyna Hutchins (Left) and injured the Director Joel Souza (Right).


How a live round (Real bullet) got on set, and loaded into that particular weapon was NOT determined during the investigation. What was determined (See the Statement of Probable Cause) was the powder obtained from the live rounds, on set, did NOT match powder taken from live rounds found at the supplier PDQ Arms-
Detectives investigated these facts, including service of a search warrant at the place of business of PDQ Arms and Prop in Albuquerque who was the supplier of the dummies and blanks to RUST. Several suspected live rounds of 45 Long Colt caliber cartridges were seized as a result; some supplied by the company owner to investigator(s), and some found at the place of business. These rounds were submitted to the FBI for comparison with the suspected live rounds found at the shooting scene. The 'Explosives Chemistry' examination of the rounds showed that the smokeless powder in the live rounds found at the scene did not match the live rounds seized from the props/arms supplier in question. This means the lives rounds on RUST did not match the rounds explosive chemistry taken from PDQ Arms and Prop.
Where the “Live rounds” came from was not determined.
As a reference there was a Workplace Safety Investigation undertaken by the New Mexico State Office of Occupational Health and Safety Bureau.

https://www.env.nm.gov/occupational_health_safety/ohsb-rust-investigation-report-materials/

A good place to start is a document filed in the Criminal Process that lays out the basis for the charge(s).
The criminal investigation conducted by the Santa Fe County Sheriffs Office also included a forensic analysis of the firearm used in the shooting by the FBI. The findings of this investigation were also turned over to the District Attorney.
From there the District Attorney and reviews the case for charges.
The District Attorney decides which charges to file based on the information contained in the documents.
To summarize the case against Alec-
1. Alec Baldwin missed the mandatory firearm safety training on set.
2. Alec Baldwin was given a special class on how to perform the cross draw by the armorer that was supposed to last an hour. He was on the phone speaking with his family and only participated in about 30 of the 60 minute class.
3. Alec, in his role of producer decided to rehearse the cross-draw scene. He did so without conducting a safety meeting. The Armorer and/or the prop master were not present to monitor safety either.
4. Alec has on numerous occasions insisted that he never pulled the trigger. Unfortunately for Alec, the rehearsal footage shows him putting his finger on the trigger. That leads to the next item.
5. Alec has claimed to be a firearm “Expert” and has been involved in some 40 or so films where firearms, or replicas were used in filming the movie.
6. His claim that he did not pull the trigger flies in the face of known data from studies. People, including Special Forces and elite law enforcement have indeed pulled a trigger NOT knowing that they did.

Now attorneys will often cite case law to more fully define the meaning of the key phrase here.
The key words here are “…….commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.”
This is what the Jury will decide. Did Alec behave in such a reckless manner that serious injury or death was likely to happen as an outcome of Alec’s purported carelessness?
This case against Alec was considerably strengthened by Alec giving interviews and making frankly really self-damaging admissions. Chief among which was “I didn’t pull the trigger.” He also had a documented history of self-claimed expert firearm skills. In my opinion I believe Alec may NOT have been charged had he simply, shut up and NOT tried to speak to the Jury pool, via the media.
Well one of the most fundamental rules of firearm safety is keep your finger OFF the trigger until you are ready to fire.
An expert would understand that.
That is because of a study conducted. It discovered the true answer for why guns really “Just went off.”
When a body moves or makes a minor body adjustment the brain involuntarily sends signals to muscles to help the body regain balance. So, when Alec made the cross draw, his finger twitched and the firearm just “Went off.”

It is also recognized in the safety standards published
INDUSTRY WIDE LABOR-MANAGEMENT SAFETY COMMITTEE SAFETY BULLETIN Home RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAFETY WITH FIREARMS AND USE OF BLANK AMMUNITION
INDUSTRY WIDE LABOR-MANAGEMENT SAFETY COMMITTEE
Page 2, item number 1 &2
1. Refrain from pointing a firearm at anyone, including yourself. If it is absolutely necessary to do so on camera, consult the Property Master (or, in his/her absence, the weapons handler and/or other appropriate personnel determined by the locality or the needs of the production) or other safety representative, such as the First A.D./Stage Manager. Remember that any object at which you point a firearm could be destroyed.
2. NEVER place your finger on the trigger until you're ready to shoot. Keep your finger alongside the firearm and off the trigger. –
Next no qualified person was there to inspect the firearm before or after the impromptu rehearsal took place. (#5 Page 2).
As producer, and without the necessary safeguards Alec called for an impromptu rehearsal. Again, no safety meeting, and no firearm inspection. At that point Alec was in fact a supervisor (The Producer as specified in his contract) who allowed the rehearsal to go forward with the tragic outcome.
Given the standard of probable cause I believe there is a case strong enough to go to trial. Will Alec be convicted? It’s possible. If Gutierrez-Reed decides to take a “Deal” and testify against Alec, it will increase the chances of conviction, IMHO.
How will the trial go? Well this will not be an easy case to prove. It will be natural to blame Halls and Gutierrez-Reed. There is a compelling case here against both of them.
If Gutierrez-Reed takes a “Deal” she may also testify against Alec. Although you can expect Mr. Baldwin’s attorneys to put Halls through the cross examination from hell. It goes double for Gutierrez-Reed. They will go all out to blame the other two defendants.
That is what Alec’s lawyers are paid to do.
On the other hand if Gutierrez-Reed goes to trial I would expect the defendants cases to be severed. Why? Because each defendant’s defense is linked to implicating the other defendant(s).
What about the prosecutor’s motives? I have seen this argument as well. The argument goes along the line of convict Alec, get elected to higher office, or go to work for Cable TV as a “Legal Expert.”
Can I prove or disprove she has those ulterior motives? No, I cannot. When I look at the circumstances of the case, I don’t think that a political consideration is the reason for going forward against Alec.
Santa Fe is a progressive county with all 5 County Supervisors being (DEM) as well as the District Attorney. Going after a famous progressive in a DEM dominated county can get you thrown out of office, if the case crashes and burns. That is entirely possible given the strength of the case against Alec, and the progressive jury pool.
Then there was the attempt by the District Attorney to name a Special Prosecutor in the case. If you want fame, you have to prosecute the case yourself, and not pass it off to someone else. The “Special Prosecutor” indeed expressed political interest in the case. She has since withdrawn.
I just do not see that type of political motive at work here.
The question central to the prosecution is:
How careless was Alec Baldwin, first as an actor, but also as a producer in the production?
Does his careless rise to the level in which he, in an effort to keep the production on budget, decide to sacrifice safety to keep the production on schedule?
Was his carelessness rise to the level of “Without due caution and circumspection.”
Twelve residents, eventually seated on the Jury may have to look at the evidence and make that decision. One thing I do understand. No one can predict what these twelve people will decide.

[tvc184]

Regardless of where it takes place, when a lethal weapon, that can ONLY be operated by the hand holding it changes hands, 100% of the responsibility changes with it.
Whether it be work or campfire, it makes 0 difference. Putting any level of blame on the armorer is ridiculous.
This shooting is 100% on Baldwin. He was screwing around and killed someone.
Because he is an arrogant, hot headed, idiot, he made the choice HIMSELF to point the gun at a person and pull the trigger, not knowing whether or not it was loaded and killed an innocent woman. And then lied about it. He is an arrogant POS. He knows exactly what he did.

A prop is not a firearm. If he reasonably believed that it was a prop, it loses the required culpability that you are ignoring.

[curtintex]

How very asinine, but not surprised.

I'm sure the grand jury that recently handed down Baldwins indictment got it all wrong. After all what do they know..

Only what the District Attorney tells them.