- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The civil suits on the Baldwin shooting are going to be EPIC!
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:18 am to NoSaint
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:18 am to NoSaint
quote:
they should be given either a non human mark to aim at
Aiming at someone is not supposed to happen.
I guess Baldwins 35 years of expertise (as one non firearm person seems to think) failed him.
But us dumb hicks, what do we know.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:20 am to Lsupimp
quote:
In other words, the protocol established over decades, somehow partially absolves those involved in this careless and negligent death.
From the actor who pulled the trigger from criminal responsibility? Yes.
There will likely be criminal responsibility on the armorer, just not the actor.
There is lots of clear civil liability to go around. Too many parts to name, but the production company, armorer, etc. will all be named and held liable.
quote:
I don’t think other professions receive this same moral and legal absolution.
When was the last time you saw a doctor get criminally charged for a mistake leading to death without intoxication being involved? Hell, they often escape civil liability.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:As I previously posted, Chloe Grace Moretz was doing just that at the age of 12 on the set of Kickass.
"Mess with" as in change the status of the weapon/ammo once it leaves the hands of the expert.
Baldwin was likely taught to do this during one of his “gun safety training” courses over the years, but completely disregards it now since he is Alec fricking Baldwin.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:21 am to Geekboy
It doesn’t make any sense why a 24 year old would be in charge of firearm safety on set. Who in the hell made this call?
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:21 am to Geekboy
Haven’t read all 18 pages so I hope this has already been addressed....
But what’s he doing with that mask in his HAND? How many MORE people is he trying to kill? Does his body count have no limits?
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:21 am to Geekboy
Baldwin should burn for this. For the simple fact that he is anti 2nd amendment and is profiting from guns in movies. frick him to the fullest extent possible.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:21 am to Breauxsif
quote:Likely the owner of the production company…
It doesn’t make any sense why a 24 year old would be in charge of firearm safety on set. Who in the hell made this call?
Someone named Alec Baldwin.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:22 am to Breauxsif
quote:Either Alec Baldwin or someone hired by Alec Baldwin.
It doesn’t make any sense why a 24 year old would be in charge of firearm safety on set. Who in the hell made this call?
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:22 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Aiming at someone is not supposed to happen.
I guess Baldwins 35 years of expertise (as one non firearm person seems to think) failed him.
But us dumb hicks, what do we know.
It might would be one thing if he were a less powerful actor and it was a super powerful director who was insisting on the camera angle. The director is the boss, and it’s hard to tell the boss no.
But, he’s one of the producers, so Baldwin was technically the director’s boss, so kinda hard to justify him not flashing rank on the set and saying “no that’s too dangerous.”
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
From the OWNER OF THE COMPANY SETTING THE SAFETY STANDARDS who pulled the trigger from CIVIL responsibility? Yes.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:23 am to theunknownknight
quote:
You’re comparing medical malpractice liability to this?
From the institutional/legal perspective, why not?
quote:
In Medicine, doctors HAVE to perform known risky procedures where the risks are reasonably known and understood by all parties.
Movies do the same thing every time a real gun is used.
quote:
Doctors are SUED often and some ARE arrested for malpractice
Doctors get arrested almost exclusively when they were intoxicated at the time of surgery.
To bring this full circle:
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:23 am to Breauxsif
quote:
Who in the hell made this call?
This sounds a bit like you're trying to blame the producer for things that happened on his watch!
We can't have that. Do you know how famous Baldwin is?
He's just a poor actor, please leave Alec alone!
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:26 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
"Mess with" as in change the status of the weapon/ammo once it leaves the hands of the expert
And you don’t realize you’re full of shite?
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:28 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
But, he’s one of the producers, so Baldwin was technically the director’s boss, so kinda hard to justify him not flashing rank on the set and saying “no that’s too dangerous.”
Its been reported that there were safety issues that caused union people to walk.
Now, I'll take that with a grain of salt until more comes out, as with Unions this could be minor shite but I would be interested in knowing the history.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:29 am to OceanMan
quote:
A person died and there are plenty of people not criticizing the control design.
This is the same logic that says we should throw out law enforcement departments when an innocent man is inadvertently killed in the field.
Just because a system fails, it doesn’t mean the system is completely broken.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:29 am to highcotton2
quote:
The movie, set in 1880's Kansas, stars Baldwin as the infamous outlaw Harland Rust, whose grandson is sentenced to hang for an accidental murder.
So does anyone know what the end result was for the grandson?
Signed,
Alec Baldwin
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:29 am to Scruffy
quote:
As I previously posted, Chloe Grace Moretz was doing just that at the age of 12 on the set of Kickass.
That comment isn't clear.
quote:
Before filming on “Kick-arse” began, Ms. Moretz spent several months in Los Angeles, London and Toronto training in gymnastics, body conditioning and weapons safety. (“Always check your gun when someone gives it to you,” she said. “Make sure it’s a fake bullet.”)
It implies this was during her pre-shooting training.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
From the institutional/legal perspective, why not?
Because from a CIVIL (also a supply/demand) perspective these are under completely different paradigms
Human Health is a NECESSITY and the high end medical professionals are trained, more difficult to replace, and forced to pay malpractice insurance
Using a prop gun in a movie is not required and can be done by any chode
The liability and protections SHOULD be different
This post was edited on 10/23/21 at 10:33 am
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:32 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
I don’t understand why anyone would bring real ammo for a gun meant for a movie in the first place. Someone in Hollywood is going to be ruined over this, and rightfully so.
Believe it or not but live rounds are used in movies. Typically they will have 1. Live rounds 2. Dummy rounds 3. Blanks
It is the responsibility of the armourer the maintain the rounds. It’s not the first time rounds have been mixed. Also, if a blank is fired there can still be wadding left in the barrel. If not properly cleared the next blank fired could cause projectiles to be fired similar to a live round.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:32 am to Mufassa
quote:
This is the same logic that says we should throw out law enforcement departments when an innocent man is inadvertently killed in the field.
This is incorrect in every single way.
If you mean review law enforcement protocols, and hold individual officers liable then you would be correct.
But you, like most here, live in the realm of extremes.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News