- 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 10:33 am to theunknownknight
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:33 am to theunknownknight
Nobody is arguing civil responsibility of the production company and armorer. That's assumed. Everyone knows there was, at the least, negligence. As I've said multiple times in this thread, the issue will be if there was gross negligence.
The dispute in this thread is the criminal implication. People who hate Alec Baldwin are shifting between arguments about civil liability and criminal liability and his role as actor and producer. These are all separated. That's why I discussed this earlier in terms of Alec Baldwin the actor and Alec Baldwin the producer. As well as separating comments bout civil and criminal liability.
I said earlier the punitives in this case could be something absurd like $500M if it goes to trial. I just looked and New Mexico does have punies
LINK
The dispute in this thread is the criminal implication. People who hate Alec Baldwin are shifting between arguments about civil liability and criminal liability and his role as actor and producer. These are all separated. That's why I discussed this earlier in terms of Alec Baldwin the actor and Alec Baldwin the producer. As well as separating comments bout civil and criminal liability.
I said earlier the punitives in this case could be something absurd like $500M if it goes to trial. I just looked and New Mexico does have punies
quote:
Punitive damages are available for direct liability in New Mexico where the plaintiff proves the
conduct of a party was malicious, willful, reckless, wanton, fraudulent or in bad faith. Similarly,
punitive damages are available for vicarious liability in New Mexico where the plaintiff proves
the conduct of an agent or employee of the party on whose conduct vicarious liability is based
was malicious, willful, reckless, wanton, fraudulent or in bad faith and that they were acting in
the scope of employment and the employer had sufficient discretionary policy-making authority
to speak and act with regard for the conduct at issue or in some other way authorized the conduct
of the employee. The Uniform Jury Instructions provide that willful conduct is the intentional
doing of an act with knowledge that harm may result and wanton conduct is the doing of an act
with utter indifference to or conscious disregard for a person's rights and/or safety.
LINK
2
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:34 am to theunknownknight
quote:
Because from a CIVIL (also a supply/demand) perspective these are under completely different paradigms
Nobody is arguing civil liability in this thread
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:34 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
in this thread is the criminal implication
Most are not.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:35 am to upgrayedd
quote:
It requires manipulation of the weapon. A weapon that the armorer is 100% responsible for. I can completely understand why an armorer wouldn't want some dumbfrick soy sipping actor fricking with his weapon after he readies it.
Bingo
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:36 am to TigerDeBaiter
quote:Lian Neeson and Daniel Craig both have made fortunes, killing people with guns in their movies. Yet, they are both anti-2nd amendment.
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 10:36 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Nobody is arguing civil liability in this thread
Yeah, its been my point since page 3. I don't know how in the hell you came up with this gem.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:37 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Nobody is arguing civil responsibility of the production company and armorer. That's assumed.
I am. And obviously it’s not assumed. Because the topic of this thread is civil suits directed at Baldwin, the owner of the production company.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:37 am to upgrayedd
quote:
It requires manipulation of the weapon. A weapon that the armorer is 100% responsible for. I can completely understand why an armorer wouldn't want some dumbfrick soy sipping actor fricking with his weapon after he readies it.
That is effectively the whole reason for the protocols and why actors shouldn't be manipulating anything once cleared by the armorer.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:37 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
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.
On military ranges, the lowliest bootfrick E1 recruit has the authority to call a ceasefire if he witnesses an unsafe act…regardless of the rank of the range officer.
Maybe more pertinent, on OSHA jobsites, the lowliest hole-watch has authority over the boss to shut down work…if he witnesses an unsafe act.
These kinds of protocols are in place to prevent exactly the kind of thing that happened this week.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:38 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Nobody is arguing civil liability in this thread
I am - because I can read the thread title
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:38 am to theunknownknight
I think he's on something
I have said this throughout the thread.
quote:
If he pointed it directly at her, I hope he gets sued to the poor house.
I have said this throughout the thread.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:38 am to theunknownknight
quote:
I am. And obviously it’s not assumed.
Oh yes, it's assumed. Just not likely against Baldwin (the actor) directly. Now his role as producer may expose him to liability. But the brunt will be via the production company and the LLC formed for the production (as well as the insurers for all parties. Likely all roads lead back to Lloyds of London).
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:40 am to OceanMan
quote:
Civil suits are the topic of the thread
quote:Fat settlement incoming to keep this out of the news and keep precious Alec's name unsullied.
Baldwin, 63, tweeted on Friday afternoon to say he had spoken with the victim's husband and that he was fully cooperating with law enforcement.
'There are no words to convey my shock and sadness regarding the tragic accident that took the life of Halyna Hutchins, a wife, mother and deeply admired colleague of ours.
'I'm fully cooperating with the police investigation to address how this tragedy occurred and I am in touch with her husband, offering my support to him and his family.
'My heart is broken for her husband, their son, and all who knew and loved Halyna,' he said.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:40 am to Godfather1
quote:
These kinds of protocols are in place to prevent exactly the kind of thing that happened this week.
Fact.
Gross negligence may have occurred.
These things don't happen without major breakdowns of more than one system.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:42 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.
Just because a system fails, it doesn’t mean the system is completely broken.
No, it’s not like that at all.
First off, Police do not act in a controlled situation. There are major variables that require discretion.
Second, I am saying the actor should be part of the system
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:43 am to Geekboy
I hope they put the dude in jail.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:44 am to Mufassa
quote:
Just because a system fails, it doesn’t mean the system is completely broken.
The system didn't just fail, the crew overlooked previous incidents of incorrectly loaded firearms.
More than one system "failed" to reach this point.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:50 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
But you, like most here, live in the realm of extremes.
Negative, look at my comments and you’d see I am advocating for review of the protocols. I think there was a break in the control of the firearms, but whereas some here are advocating for more hands being involved in on-set gun safety, I’m advocating for fewer.
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:51 am to Mufassa
quote:
look at my comments and you’d see I am advocating for review of the protocols.
But your field of play is all or nothing.
Such as, dissolving police departments instead of the rational thing, look at how to improve them.
Anytime there is negligence, you gotta find a way to do better.
A simple glance, 2-3 seconds at your round will tell you whether its live or not. Redundant systems are intelligent systems.
This post was edited on 10/23/21 at 10:54 am
Posted on 10/23/21 at 10:55 am to tigersownall
quote:
I hope they put the dude in jail.
Totally a thread about civil liability
This post was edited on 10/23/21 at 10:56 am
Page 20 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News