I said before three questions must be asked.

Is there a procedure?

Is the procedure correct?

Was the procedure followed?

In most case when something goes awry the procedure was NOT followed.  That's probably the case with Baldwin.  Time constraints, shortcuts, laziness, familiarity with the procedure (I don't need a checklist), or even willful behavior.

This is a 2017 article of an actor killed on the set in Australia.  It outlines a proper procedure to be used when firearms are going to be discharged while filming a scene.

 https://theconversation.com/explainer-the-rules-for-shooting-on-film-sets-71797

Noel

40 minutes ago, birdguy said:

This is a 2017 article of an actor killed on the set in Australia.  It outlines a proper procedure to be used when firearms are going to be discharged while filming a scene.

From the article:

"Each time a gun is handed to a performer, the armourer must open the weapon’s breach and present it to the performer with verbal confirmation such as, 'The weapon is clear'."

 

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

And any one of those hands might replace a blank cartridge for a real cartridge, especially in the case of a revolver.

 

2 hours ago, Adrian123 said:

Why?

Common theme in TV murder mysteries.

10 minutes ago, dmwalker said:

From the article:

"Each time a gun is handed to a performer, the armourer must open the weapon’s breach and present it to the performer with verbal confirmation such as, 'The weapon is clear'."

 

That sounds like a very practical way to do it.  Now my question is.....Was Mr.Baldwin "directed" to aim in the general direction of the cinematographer and he decided to use her as his target, since she was probably at a safe distance from a blank discharge?

On 10/23/2021 at 2:37 PM, Rob_Ainscough said:

So if you take your car to get the brakes serviced/replaced and you drive home and the brakes fail and you kill someone because you can’t stop, it’s your fault because you didn’t inspect the mechanics work before leaving the shop?
 

Being a fire arms user isn’t the issue as much as not being an automotive mechanic.  Your assignment of responsibility doesn’t make any logical sense.

Rob

You know Rob, in some cases it could be. It would be up to you to prove that your brakes did indeed fail and as a result of the shops negligence. Until then the onus would be on you. Even then you might be named as a party with the shop in a wrongful death suit. 

Just a little fence post lawyering here:) 

35 minutes ago, charliearon said:

That sounds like a very practical way to do it.  Now my question is.....Was Mr.Baldwin "directed" to aim in the general direction of the cinematographer and he decided to use her as his target, since she was probably at a safe distance from a blank discharge?

As I understand it, they were setting up a shot with a high speed camera to capture the muzzle flash and he fired. Typically they aim a few degrees left/right of camera center. Sometimes there are people standing in the "line of fire". BUT the gun was supposed to be cold, meaning unloaded. IMHO, the AD is the prime screw up - he declared it a cold gun and he was wrong.

Now, if this was a  movie script, we'd find that he was having an affair with the cinematographer and she jilted him so he set the whole thing up to get rid of her.  OR the shot was planned for the director so the AD could move up.

Bottom line, there ARE safe handling procedures in place on set, they didn't follow them.

17 minutes ago, Patco Lch said:

You know Rob, in some cases it could be. It would be up to you to prove that your brakes did indeed fail and as a result of the shops negligence. Until then the onus would be on you. Even then you might be named as a party with the shop in a wrongful death suit. 

If I was to take my car out of the shop after a brake job the first thing I would was test the brakes; not once, but several times.

Noel

4 hours ago, birdguy said:

Why?

 

 

Noel. That wasn't my quote, you have quoted Tim and added my name to it! If you want to ask Tim about something he said, do so, but don't put my name to it. 

 

Quote

In fact a movie set where firearms are going to be discharged should be a prime location for gun safety rules since a gun may change hands several times between the armorers bench and shooter's hand.

 

As you've already been told, and evidenced by the video I posted, movie sets ARE a prime location for gun safety, precisely why only three deaths have occurred after thousands of rounds have been discharged over many decades. Apart from the new Baldwin incident. Look again at the video I posted, an interview with two  prop masters. Both said the same thing, that gun safety is "bulletin number one" and industry recognised safety protocols are strictly enforced. An actor the other day, commented how strict they are even with plastic toy guns on set, in that they have to be thoroughly checked and signed in and out. The safety measures are clearly in place, they just don't do it the way you would like them to do it. 

 

Quote

 a gun may change hands several times between the armorers bench and shooter's hand.

 

There is no changing hands numerous times, except in terms of multiple safety checks. Unless something goes badly wrong and safety protocols aren't followed.  THREE times this has gone wrong out of thousands of rounds fired and many decades... that should make it evident to you that the film industry actually knows what its doing and how to do it in their unique environment. 

 

Quote

I can't believe the ignorance of firearm safety going on in this thread.  Even as a 14 year old I knew more about gun safety than some of those responding here.

 

😌 Err... I think you will find that Tim is highly trained in terms of gun safety and is of the same opinion as me. And as Ive already said, my father was a marksman in the army and we frequently visited the rifle range in the UK before such things were prohibited. Both Tim and I are aware of basic gun safety. Insulting us is unnecessary, just because we disagree with you. We understand the unique environment that is a film set.

Below you will find exactly what you have been told many times. The safety checks on movie sets are extreme, and if followed, are designed to spot  a dangerous situation at many stages. 

 

Quote

Gun safety protocols are rigid on film and TV sets. This 'should never have happened.'

 

Quote

While declining to speculate about what happened on the set, Hollywood veterans say even the most rudimentary of weapons protocols that are rigorously followed on most sets would have averted this rare catastrophe.

 

 

Quote

There are so many stopgaps normally, so many places this could have gotten caught.”

 

 

 

Quote

 

On-set guns: checked, rechecked, and checked again

First the weapon is fetched from a safe. It is immediately checked to make sure there is no ammunition in the chamber. This is often done by shining a flashlight into the barrel or by using a thin rod pushed through the chamber.

If the weapon is brought by an armorer to a prop master, the prop master will perform the exact same check and then put the gun back into its protective sleeve. Once on the set, the gun goes through the same check in the presence of the assistant director.

“I’m usually a nervous wreck when we have to use firearms on a shoot, because it is a weapon and you can’t be complacent,” says Walters, who lives in northern New Mexico and has spent plenty of time on Western-style films the state has attracted for nearly a century. “It’s just far too serious a thing to take lightly.”

At this point in the process, there are options. If the actors and crew are rehearsing, often a rubber replica gun is handed to the actor. If at the next stage of blocking the scene a real weapon is required by the director, then the thoroughly checked empty weapon is brought out.

Once the scene is ready to be shot, the prop master or armorer will load prepared blanks with no bullet tips into the gun’s chamber. “We’ll put in not one more than the number of shots the actor plans to shoot,” Walters says.

Once the weapon is loaded and in the actor’s hand, an assistant director typically yells “Gun’s hot,” and the scene is shot. “If there are delays of any kind, to tweak the lights or anything, I will take that gun back,” Walters says.

Likewise, as soon as the scene is wrapped, the prop master will reclaim the weapon and secure it.

 

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/gun-safety-protocols-rigid-film-090045777.html?guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAANcCqW8AkpO0E5khlInmbBNbyeTb3mbE-ZUUuQlaTu7Ep2FEq7o_rhG_h7sArZwiOnqwImgBLmFvVTpb_sHVC6_t8THWJlMSB6aAIMvUuwnxIPPcr7E8KoCycjoqK4oXEhuQm2A3ThqaICI93GJ2eMAzvMzvb-yts9E8JTYFeAIi

Edited October 24, 20214 yr by martin-w

35 minutes ago, vgbaron said:

Bottom line, there ARE safe handling procedures in place on set, they didn't follow them.

Anyone with KBUR as a location has cred on film 🙂

And Bob Hope airport is my favorite scenery.

4 hours ago, birdguy said:

I can't believe the ignorance of firearm safety going on in this thread.

I'm assuming my friend Noel is excluding me there. My location alone should exempt me from firearms ignorance charges. I'm also impressed that this has not become about guns per se as it would anywhere else. This round's on me.

By the way, my practical experience in film has not involved being on film sets. I do have an IMDB profile (who doesn't these days?) with a couple of insignificant voice acting credits. (I have the perfect face for radio.) I have dabbled shooting 4k RAW documentaries, but am too old and crippled to lug that stuff around. I know about film the way a lot of us here know a lot about airplanes: passion, compulsive study, and a bit of experience as a student pilot.. But, alas, I have never been close to a movie set.

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

I said before three questions must be asked.

 

Quote

Is there a procedure?

 

Yes, a strict one, industry recognised and strictly adhered to.

 

Quote

Is the procedure correct?

 

Yes! Hence why so few accidents have occurred after so many decades.

 

Quote

Was the procedure followed?

 

Obviously not! 🙄

 

Quote

In most case when something goes awry the procedure was NOT followed.  That's probably the case with Baldwin.  

 

Err... obviously! 😩

I'm out of here, or I'll need to go back on medication. 

I assume that normal procedure on a movie set is for the weapons expert to be the only person (other than the actor) to handle any guns? Anybody else picking them up and handing them to actors is just asking for trouble.

 

"a gun may change hands several times between the armorers bench and shooter's hand."

The question is why should it? The Australian article clearly says the armorer should give the gun directly to the actor and demonstrate that it is safe. Why should the prop master or assistant director be involved in the handover? Where was the armorer in this case?

Edited October 24, 20214 yr by dmwalker

I do not own a gun, and have no desire to own one. Even so, I've never forgotten what was drummed into my head during Basic and AIT while in the Army. Every time I checked out my weapon (rifle or pistol), the very first thing I did was to ensure the weapon was safe, including looking down the barrel to insure there was no obstruction. In the case of my rifle, I'd use my thumbnail to reflect light down the barrel if necessary...  😎

As automatic as breathing Fr. Bill.  So automatic it is difficult to fathom anyone handling firearms not to do that.  Out hunting, on the range, and in the military I've never had to remind anyone of that.  

Noel