Alec Baldwin fatally shoots woman with prop gun on movie set

[LegalAmerican]

Did the revolver also point itself at the woman, Alec, before pulling its own trigger?

And first,  cocking itself.   

[Lando Lincoln]

Most sources report the gun was a Colt Single-Action Army. If so, what Baldwin is saying about not pulling the trigger is plausible. The Colt SAA does not have a modern transfer bar or hammer block safety system that prevents the hammer from impacting a live round without the trigger being pulled. If you pull the hammer back on the SAA without being fully cocked, and then releasing it, the hammer can strike with sufficient force to fire a round in the live cylinder. This is why most shooters of the SAA keep an empty cylinder under the hammer.

That said, he is still responsible for the safety of that gun.

[mountaineer]

Samantha Chang
@samantha_chang
The hit TV show "Yellowstone" has lots of gunfights (including a jaw-dropping 13.5-minute nonstop gunfight in its Season 4 opener).

Unlike Alec, none of the actors shot or killed production staffers.
7:45 AM · Dec 3, 2021·

[mountaineer]

Stephen Gutowski
@StephenGutowski
2m
This is a great visual demonstration of why Alec Baldwin's description of how the gun fired without the trigger being pulled is implausible.

https://twitter.com/noraneus/status/1466747943202041862

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1466753482011160577

[DefiantMassRINO]

Was Alec using a Smart Gun with a low IQ?  How else does a gun spontaneously fire itself?

[Idiot]

Of course he did it, he just won't admit it.  He'll get off with a slap on the wrist, but will have to live with the fact he killed someone for the rest of his life.  It would eat up a normal person.

[verga]

https://mobile.twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1466753482011160577

I am waiting for LeBron James to come out and claim "Crocodile tears".

[mystery-ak]

Alec Baldwin Describes What Happened on ‘Rust’ Set: “I Let Go of the Hammer and ‘Bang,’ the Gun Goes Off”

In his first sit-down interview since the shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, Baldwin spoke to ABC's George Stephanopoulos.
December 2, 2021 6:27pm

Baldwin told the interviewer, Good Morning America’s George Stephanopoulos, that he did not want to wait for the lawsuits or investigations to conclude before telling his side of the story. “I think that there is a criminal investigation, that could be a while. There is all kinds of civil litigation, and I felt that there were a lot of misconceptions,” Baldwin said. “The sheriff’s department hasn’t even released a report to the DA yet … I feel like I can’t wait for that process to end.”

more
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/alec-baldwin-abc-interview-rust-1235056159/

[deb]

He pointed the gun at her. Even if it mysteriously “went off by itself”, he still had it pointed at her.
Another simple gun rule broken.

[Kamaji]

Alec Baldwin Describes What Happened on ‘Rust’ Set: “I Let Go of the Hammer and ‘Bang,’ the Gun Goes Off”

In his first sit-down interview since the shooting death of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins, Baldwin spoke to ABC's George Stephanopoulos.
December 2, 2021 6:27pm

Baldwin told the interviewer, Good Morning America’s George Stephanopoulos, that he did not want to wait for the lawsuits or investigations to conclude before telling his side of the story. “I think that there is a criminal investigation, that could be a while. There is all kinds of civil litigation, and I felt that there were a lot of misconceptions,” Baldwin said. “The sheriff’s department hasn’t even released a report to the DA yet … I feel like I can’t wait for that process to end.”

more
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/alec-baldwin-abc-interview-rust-1235056159/

Sounds like it was too close of a replica to the original, and didn't have a transfer bar.  That being said, it was still Baldwin's duty - nondelegable duty - as the holder of the firearm to understand all of its mechanisms - including the fact that it didn't have a transfer bar (my speculation for now) - and to understand the consequences of interacting with that firearm, including manually pulling the hammer back part way and letting it fall.

Baldwin failed those duties, or was negligent in carrying them out, and the death was therefore proximately caused by his own negligence.  He is therefore personally liable for that death (and the other injury).

[mountaineer]

He pointed the gun at her. Even if it mysteriously “went off by itself”, he still had it pointed at her.
Another simple gun rule broken.

They weren't even filming at the time. He didn't check to make sure the gun was unloaded, and he pointed the gun for no reason whatsoever.

Actor John Schneider reacts:

... An investigation into the incident has been underway for a month now, and Baldwin spoke out Thursday night, claiming during a tell-all interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News that despite holding the gun, he "didn't pull the trigger."

Ahead of Baldwin's interview, a preview was released, which featured Baldwin's comments, and Schneider, 61, shared his thoughts on the matter in an
18-minute video titled "Seriously Alec?"

Schneider claimed the interview was "all designed to make us feel sorry for Alec Baldwin" and claimed the actor's teary-eyed emotional responses during the interview were "bulls--t."  ...

"What kind of idiots do you take us for?" the actor questioned. He then pleaded with law enforcement, asking investigators not to believe Baldwin's claim, calling it "nonsense." ...

Yahoo News

[240B]

Why would he cock the gun if he did not intend to shoot it?

[240B]

He pointed the gun at her. Even if it mysteriously “went off by itself”, he still had it pointed at her.
Another simple gun rule broken.

Read an article the day it happened in which someone on set reported Baldwin was pointing the gun at everyone near him as a kind of 'joke'. He was playing around with the weapon.

[yodaspock]

I just want to clear up the "I didn't pull the trigger comment" by Alec Baldwin. The pistol he was using was copy of the Colt Single action Army. It's a very old style of pistol with no safety features, It is usually carried with the hammer down on an empty chamber, so you have to cock the revolver, to place a new round under the firing pin then pull the trigger. These are the pistols that could be fanned, Which is holding the trigger down and quickly moving the hammer back so it slams' forward over and over till the gun is empty. You can tell it's this kind of pistol by the firing pin on the hammer.

If you put the hammer down on a full chamber and you jar the hammer the shell it will fire (right into your foot)

So, it is possible to fire the gun by pulling the hammer not to the trigger lock position, but just before that point and releasing the hammer, so it slams forward and fires the shell.

 

[240B]

Why would he cock the hammer if he did not intend to shoot?
Pulling the hammer back shows intent, whether or not he pulled the trigger.
Pulling the hammer back is the same as pulling the trigger.

[Kamaji]

Why would he cock the hammer if he did not intend to shoot?
Pulling the hammer back shows intent, whether or not he pulled the trigger.
Pulling the hammer back is the same as pulling the trigger.

Since he believed the gun was not loaded - a claim that seems reasonable - there was not sufficient intent to shoot.

That is the whole point of the gun safety rules - they exist to prevent bad things happening unintentionally, not to stop intentional actions.

[240B]

Since he believed the gun was not loaded - a claim that seems reasonable - there was not sufficient intent to shoot.

That is the whole point of the gun safety rules - they exist to prevent bad things happening unintentionally, not to stop intentional actions.

Of course there was intent to fire. Whether a blank or a live round he certainly intended to fire the weapon.

[Kamaji]

Of course there was intent to fire. Whether a blank or a live round he certainly intended to fire the weapon.

There does not appear to be. 

But that is irrelevant.  Getting hung up on "intent to fire" is exactly what he wants, because he wins in that scenario.

What matters is that he negligently handled a firearm - a nondelegable duty - and as a proximate cause of that negligence, somebody died.  He is liable for the damages of his negligence.

[Absalom]

Adversity is the greatest challenge to a Man's Character, giving one the opportunity to prove
their worth; as such, Bozo Baldwin's horse manure clearly labels him devoid of character.
What a shock from this Hollywood flunkey, eh?

[mountaineer]

There does not appear to be. 

But that is irrelevant.  Getting hung up on "intent to fire" is exactly what he wants, because he wins in that scenario.

What matters is that he negligently handled a firearm - a nondelegable duty - and as a proximate cause of that negligence, somebody died.  He is liable for the damages of his negligence.

Indeed. Has he been charged with (at the very least) involuntary manslaughter yet?

[DCPatriot]

Of course he did it, he just won't admit it.  He'll get off with a slap on the wrist, but will have to live with the fact he killed someone for the rest of his life.  It would eat up a normal person.

He stands to lose MILLIONS of $$$... damned right he's going to "...pull a Joey Bishop".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yN2gU0XU5FU

[DCPatriot]

Of course there was intent to fire. Whether a blank or a live round he certainly intended to fire the weapon.

Within the first several hours since the shooting, it was being reported that the deceased woman was 'instructing' Baldwin about the gun...he got frustrated and said, "You mean like THIS?"  And then gun fired.

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/status/1466859790919942145

[Right_in_Virginia]

https://mobile.twitter.com/newsmax/status/1466901308015669249