Fewer than three weeks before actor Alec Baldwin is due to go on trial in Santa Fe, New Mexico, prosecutors have said that he “engaged in horseplay with the revolver”, including firing a blank round at a crew member on the set of Rust before the tragic accident occurred.

Baldwin is facing involuntary manslaughter charges in the 2021 shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins.

In new court documents, prosecutors said they plan to bring new evidence to support their case that the 66-year-old actor and producer was reckless with firearms while filming on the set and displayed “erratic and aggressive behavior during the filming” that created potential safety concerns.

Prosecutors in the case, which is due to go to trial on 10 July, have previously alleged that to watch Baldwin’s conduct on the set of Rust “is to witness a man who has absolutely no control of his own emotions and absolutely no concern for how his conduct affects those around him”.

In the latest filing, special prosecutors Kari Morrissey and Erlinda Johnson allege that Baldwin pointed his gun and fired “a blank round at a crew member while using that crew member as a line of site as his perceived target”.

  • @Fillicia@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    1414 days ago

    The must be a way to create “false” gun in the sense that they only takes blanks and have nonfunctional barrels. Or I’m I too optimistic?

    • @PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3114 days ago

      Unfortunately, guns are deceptively simple. Just about anything that can detonate a realistic looking blank is capable of firing an actual bullet. And even if it’s just a blank, any obstruction in the barrel can end up becoming an ad-hoc projectile by the force. Every once in a while, you have that happen in Civil War re-enactments.

          • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            1414 days ago

            Ok but that’s a separate issue and something that can happen with a regular gun loaded with a regular caliber blank, what they’re saying is fake guns for movies should use a caliber for which no bullets exist, solving the main part of the issue, i.e. the fact that someone can load a normal bullet in a gun that is to be used as a prop.

            • @bolexforsoup
              link
              2
              edit-2
              13 days ago

              It’s not a separate issue. It’s exactly how Brandon Lee died. It was just a piece of a bullet, not even a complete one. Lots of hard objects that can get lodged in there that instantly become a lethal projectile.

              Besides this person wants “realistic recoil.” That requires a lot of force. So it’s always a risk.

                • @bolexforsoup
                  link
                  2
                  edit-2
                  13 days ago

                  That is exactly what we are saying. They should not use firearms that are capable of launching projectiles. Which is exactly what happened on the set of Rust.

                  As a camera operator I have no desire to die for somebody else’s art. Especially not just because they want a more realistic looking firearm/recoil.

      • @VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        914 days ago

        Thats also how Brandon Lee died. Iirc there was a squib malfunction that they didn’t notice so when they shot a blank, the round was pushed out and killed him.

    • @lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2114 days ago

      If the armorer wasn’t willfully negligent it wouldn’t be a problem. Not a problem for the vast majority of film sets. Just pure lack of professionalism from the armorer whose sole core responsibility is to ensure safety.

      • FuglyDuck
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2014 days ago

        if Baldwin wasn’t waiving a gun around like a moron, a negligent armorer wouldn’t have been a problem, either.

        the armorer being negligent (and she was), doesn’t mean that Baldwin wasn’t also being negligent. and lets be perfectly clear: the reason Gutierrez-Reed was hired over other more professional armorers is precisely because she was “less professional”- or more bluntly, because she was willing to not insist on proper safety protocols that caused delays in shooting.

        • @cybersandwich@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          1914 days ago

          Woah woah woah. Baldwin should be allowed to do whatever the fuck he wants with a prop gun. If an armorer gives him a gun on a set, why would he reasonably believe it was able to hurt or kill someone?

          If an actor is given a prop pipe bomb, and he throws it at a cast member in jest and it explodes…because the explosive expert gave him a live explosive why the fuck is that the actors fault?

          Why is is Alec’s fault he was horsing around with what effectively should have been a toy. It should have been a fancy cap gun at worst.

          • FuglyDuck
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2214 days ago

            Woah woah woah. Baldwin should be allowed to do whatever the fuck he wants with a prop gun. If an armorer gives him a gun on a set, why would he reasonably believe it was able to hurt or kill someone?

            because it’s a fucking weapon. he knew it was a weapon.

            secondly, it was Hall (another producer) that gave him the weapon, not HGR.

            thirdly, you don’t fuck around with even the non-firing propguns precisely because of how easy it is to mistake them. He fucked around, and Alyna Hutchins found out. Ergo, it’s negligent homicide

            • @Tyfud@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              1114 days ago

              Hate to say it, but I agree here.

              This is the price paid for not treating real guns with respect. Prop bullets or otherwise.

        • The Octonaut
          link
          fedilink
          814 days ago

          Wouldn’t the live round have shot someone no matter what? The point of a blank round is so you can aim a gun at someone and not kill them.

          • FuglyDuck
            link
            fedilink
            English
            614 days ago

            Uhm.

            That’s not how Blanks work

            And even if there is some how no wadding They can still be lethal

            You cannot render a functional weapon (blank firing or “real” or whatever you want to call it,) totally safe.

            Which is why you should always treat them as something that will kill you given half the chance. (It was literally made to do just that.)

            And you should always treat look alikes as if they were real because a) they’re easy to mistake for real ones and vice versa and b) the other people may not realize it’s a prop. (On a movie set, unlikely, but you never know who’s around and how they will respond. Or where an active shooter is going to appear.)

            As for the cartridges, usually there’s tell tales of one sort or another. For dummy rounds it’s common to press the otherwise empty cartridge with a ball bearing or two so they rattle when shaken. Sometimes they also have a small hole on the wall of the casing

            Blanks are, by their nature, lacking the bullet and the top is simply crimped to hold the wadding.

            All it would have taken was a proper inspection to verify that it was unloaded/loaded with dummy rounds. Or, alternatively, Baldwin not pointing it at people.

            Which leads me to the final thing you should always do: check the damn weapon. Don’t trust armorers. They’re people, too. They make mistakes, they fuck up.

            • The Octonaut
              link
              fedilink
              614 days ago

              Can I ask what the point of this screed was? I’m aware blanks are dangerous. That’s irrelevant. There was a real bullet in the chamber. At some point, even if it was a blank, it would have been pointed at someone and the trigger pulled.

              The point appears to be “check the damn weapon”, which of course you could have said without ‘educating’ me, and wouldn’t have been undercut with going on endlessly about wadding.

              That point is a terrible one because the armourer is the expert, and is the one who should be signing the gun off as safe every time it is opened, not an actor who neither is required to have qualifications nor skills in clearing a gun as safe. If an actor interferes with the weapon, the armourer has to check it again.

              • FuglyDuck
                link
                fedilink
                English
                514 days ago

                It’s stupidly easy to check a firearm. You don’t have to be an expert to do it. For most fire arms it takes 5-10 seconds.

                A large part of the “experts” job is to know what is and is not safe protocol, and to enforce it. Part of that includes teaching everyone who’s handling a weapon how to…. Handle a weapon safely.

                no question, the armorer fucked up. She’s human. Humans make mistakes. Which is why you check the damn weapon, too. An expert doesn’t mean they don’t make mistakes. An expert means they’ve made enough they should know better. (Or have learned from an older expert.)

              • @VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                414 days ago

                Frist off, it is also the actors’ job to ensure the gun is safe. He should have been there when the gun was checked and verified it for himself especially when he purposely hired a fuck around and find out armourer.

                Secondly, how were they supposed to know your level of knowledge about firearms and ammunition? With them explaining stuff in a simple and quick manner, we are all now operating on the same level of basic knowledge about this, so there should not be any miscommunications going on.

      • @FireTower@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        1114 days ago

        HGR definitely didn’t do right here but a lot more went wrong. This was a perfect storm of negligence. Multiple people could have taken minor stands to have prevented this tragic tale. So many people spoke out and zero action was taken to address their concerns.

        A layered safety approach is a great idea. But it only works when at least one person in a position to do so does what’s right.

        • FuglyDuck
          link
          fedilink
          English
          514 days ago

          Multiple people could have taken minor stands to have prevented this tragic tale

          Hutchins took one of those stands filing a union complaint about the safety violations, how tinfoily you wanna get?

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      514 days ago

      A blank killed Brandon Lee while filming The Crow.

      Although I don’t know the details admittedly.

    • @jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      314 days ago

      Yeah, you would think you could just change the chambers and bullets so only a certain standard of blanks would fit in it, although I guess those guns would become more expensive than the real mass produced ones.

      Either way, this is all the result of Baldwin as executive producer cheaping out on every aspect of this shoot, causing this to happen.

    • @the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      314 days ago

      If you shot a blank in a gun with a plugged barrel the gun would explode. A blank is just a round minus the projectile, it has just as much “push” from the powder as a real round does.

        • @the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          313 days ago

          Brandon Lee died because in a previous scene they used bullets without a casing so the revolver wouldnt look empty facing the camera. One of them got stuck in the barrel, and in the next scene where they were using blanks it was propelled out and struck him. A blank with a bullet in front of it is essntially just a live round with extra steps. Idk what you think I’m incorrect about. That doesn’t mean filling in the barrel would be safer, it wouldn’t, the gun would explode. The energy released by igniting gunpowder has to go somewhere.

    • @VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      214 days ago

      I know some pistols have a co2 blow back system that you can install on your gun so you can practice drawing and dry firing without fear of damaging the gun or hurting people. The only one I know of is for glocks but I’m sure a company could make them for more models.

      • @justaderp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        313 days ago

        At that point one should should buy the gas blowback replica that the manufacturer licensed for airsoft. It’ll have identical wright and balance, the trigger can usually be tuned to match, and it’ll dry fire with about half recoil. It’ll plink on target at 40’ once the hop-up is calibrated. Should be a modest $150-250 for common Glock, Sig, etc.

    • @ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      214 days ago

      Some guns are modified in that way for movies. They are still potentially dangerous. Blanks can harm someone close enough or accidentally propel something lodged in the barrel.

    • @HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      114 days ago

      I know there at least used to be gas powered airsoft guns that had minor ‘recoil.’ I don’t know if there’s anything particular about them that makes them bad for filming, maybe just the lack of real force on the shooters wrist/shoulder.

      • @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        314 days ago

        Yeah the recoil is much weaker on those and there’s no muzzle flash, and certain cinematic shots just can’t be done with them like they could with an actual gun.