Octopus Overlords

TheMix wrote: ↑Sun Nov 07, 2021 5:28 pm There is a difference between knowing your responsibilities and being able to act upon that knowledge. It feels like you are suggesting that she wasn't even aware that one of her responsibilities was to insure that the guns on the set did not have live ammo. That's the part the I don't understand. I get that she didn't do it (as evidence would suggest), but that she didn't even know it was her responsibility? That seems like a stretch.

I agree, and wouldn't that responsibility be in the job description? It sounds fairly basic to assume that it would be something one would know just by accepting said job, especially when that person's family has had history doing the same job. And it's very likely in the contract.

Sidenote: news says someone on the set got bit by a brown recluse spider and may lose the arm.

Who the hell lets loaded spiders on the movie set?!

They had yelled "cold spider" too.

stimpy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 01, 2021 7:27 pm magic gun pulls it's own trigger

Were cameras rolling? Would be pretty easy to confirm or not.

If they weren't rolling, what is he doing handling a loaded (blanks or otherwise) gun on set?

I wouldn't think you would practice a scene with a hot gun.

Everyone said it wasn't.

Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 01, 2021 11:05 pm Everyone said it wasn't.

Everyone was wrong.

Plus, assume every gun is hot/loaded until you check it yourself. Or you see the propmaster check it.


Guns don't magically become loaded and they don't magically fire themselves. This was layer upon layer of human error and/or negligence Now it's layer upon layer of finger pointing.

How do you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger loaded or not. And how do you ask for an unloaded gun for the express purpose of doing so.

Hey! Armorer! Gimmie an unloaded gun so I can point it at *forummember* and pull the trigger.

How insane and stupid is that?

Jesus. Please go back and read the original information. He pointed it towards the camera. You know, so it would look right in the film. The people were standing next to/behind the camera.

We've been over that about a thousand times now.

And him not pulling the trigger is a possibility. If this was a truly authentic revolver, it could be fired if the hammer snagged on something, pulled partway back, and slipped off. This can happen while drawing the revolver if it snags on clothing. Or if the scene he was practicing called for him to pull the hammer back and he didn't pull it quite far enough to engage the sear.

Drazzil wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:25 pm How do you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger loaded or not. And how do you ask for an unloaded gun for the express purpose of doing so.

Hey! Armorer! Gimmie an unloaded gun so I can point it at *forummember* and pull the trigger.

How insane and stupid is that?

Some people were not doing a proper job that they should have been doing in the first place, and there were a number of complaints on set of things being done improperly before this happened. It just so happened that this one incident ended up in a fatality. A lack of common sense and lack of procedure being followed.

I had a double barreled shotgun once that would fire at almost the slightest jiggle. Had to repair a six inch hole in the roof with that once. Sold it the next day.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:48 pm We've been over that about a thousand times now.

And him not pulling the trigger is a possibility. If this was a truly authentic revolver, it could be fired if the hammer snagged on something, pulled partway back, and slipped off. This can happen while drawing the revolver if it snags on clothing. Or if the scene he was practicing called for him to pull the hammer back and he didn't pull it quite far enough to engage the sear.

It was a Colt SAA . Assuming it was authentic and wasn't doctored or in disrepair it would need to be fully cocked to fire. It wouldn't go off from a half cocked position unless dropped or hit on a loaded chamber. It locks on the safety notch and half-cock so slipping off the hammer wouldn't fire. It's far more likely that he did pull the trigger from fully cocked without realizing it or remembering it. It's fairly common in shootings.

This is a recounting of what he said:

“I let go of the hammer and the gun goes off. I never pulled the trigger,” he said.

Either the gun was in severe disrepair, was unsafely modified, or wasn't a real Colt SAA, or he did have is finger on the trigger when he let go of the hammer. Like I said, on a functioning SAA the hammer wouldn't fall on the chamber when let go unless the trigger was pulled.

Sounds like one thats been modified for the Hollywood 'fanning' firing.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:22 am This is a recounting of what he said:

“I let go of the hammer and the gun goes off. I never pulled the trigger,” he said.

Either the gun was in severe disrepair, was unsafely modified, or wasn't a real Colt SAA

I wasn't sure what gun he'd used. Given what we've have heard about the armorer, though, I don't think I'd discount any of those possibilities. Fanning and quick drawing are very hard on revolvers. If the person choosing, modifying, and maintaining one used that way doesn't know their stuff, it's going to end up either falling apart or close to it. Hell, I wouldn't put it past that idiot (the armorer) to have ammo with corroded primers.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 8:06 am Sounds like one thats been modified for the Hollywood 'fanning' firing.

Also a possibility - what if they gave him the wrong gun? It isn't unusual for a set to have several visually identical guns. A stunt piece for rough treatment (dropping, hitting), a hero prop for close-ups/reloading scenes, ect, a couple modified for specific activities (rebalanced for spinning, modified for fanning, etc.) What if they had him practicing his draw with a gun modified for something else?

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:35 am It isn't unusual for a set to have several visually identical guns.

I feel like this goes against what everyone else has been saying, in that props are expensive and that's why they don't make special movie prop guns that can't possibly fire... etc. etc.

I mean, it's either that they were cutting things cheap and were not using 'props' when they should have, or now you are saying perhaps it was a confusion over the safe prop guns and the unsafe 'for shooting scene only' guns...


unrelated:
Apparently, Baldwin thought he fired a blank at the time, and that the woman collapsed because she maybe fainted or something.... ? and he held that thought for about 45 minutes... !

Or how about.....he pulled the trigger and is trying to cover his ass?

stimpy wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:50 am Or how about.....he pulled the trigger and is trying to cover his ass?

Well, that's a headscratcher. What on earth do you mean?

" Cover his ass " by making it perfectly clear that he didn't think he was actually shooting her? Is that something you feel he feels he needs to establish?

Cover his ass as in " The gun shot itself, I had nothing to do with it", even though there has been no indication by anyone that he was told to practice how he pulls, aims and fires the magic gun at the moment he did.

You quoted him as saying he "fired" the blank.
How exactly did he fire it without pulling the trigger, which he is now saying he didnt do?

It's odd that the moment it went off of the moment he was pointing at the camera. What made that moment different than all the others that led up to it?

Presumably he had cocked the single action immediately before and that could have done it on a defective/tampered with gun. But other than that, a trigger pull is the most likely explanation. This includes cocking while holding the trigger down. This is a common error among inexperienced shooters, especially when trying to get off quick shots.


It's gone from "didn't know it was loaded" to "shouldn't have had real ammo" to "didn't pull the trigger."

There were several points of failure, the least of which appeared to be Baldwin but his constant fingerpointing and weird interviews are not helping his cause.

(Edit: in reply to Stimpy)

Well... Those were my words. I never quoted him.

And in any case, I don’t understand the need for him to distance himself from ‘pulling the trigger’ in this context. I may be being naive, but I don’t think he’s trying to cover his ass.

If his ‘ass is exposed’ it’s not at the moment of the trigger being pulled or not pulled. It’s at a whole other level.

stimpy wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:08 am Cover his ass as in " The gun shot itself, I had nothing to do with it", even though there has been no indication by anyone that he was told to practice how he pulls, aims and fires the magic gun at the moment he did.

You quoted him as saying he "fired" the blank.
How exactly did he fire it without pulling the trigger, which he is now saying he didnt do?

He's saying that the gun went off when he pulled the hammer down, without him pulling the trigger. As an east coast elitist I have almost no knowledge of how guns work, so I don't know how plausible that is.

Different guns can have different trigger resistance. Some might require a heavy 8lb trigger. Some might be less than 2, which is pretty much a hair trigger. Someone holding a cocked revolver with a hair trigger might fire the gun without realizing they pulled the trigger since it takes such little force to drop the hammer on that gun. Baldwin might not have meant to pull the trigger, but it's unlikely it fired without some sort of trigger pull, no matter how light.

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:43 am

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 9:35 am It isn't unusual for a set to have several visually identical guns.

I feel like this goes against what everyone else has been saying, in that props are expensive and that's why they don't make special movie prop guns that can't possibly fire... etc. etc.

I mean, it's either that they were cutting things cheap and were not using 'props' when they should have, or now you are saying perhaps it was a confusion over the safe prop guns and the unsafe 'for shooting scene only' guns...

It was me that was saying that, too. And it's not quite as contradictory as it sounds. The hero prop, the one we see in the holster, see the character cleaning, loading, holding, fire blanks out of - that's the top notch, best quality gun. It's job is to be pretty. And, as I recall, in some productions the hero gun does not fire, in which case there's also a gun they use just for firing sequences. And if they're going to fan, they likely have one that's altered and reinforced for just that purpose. And yet, it's still far, far cheaper and more practical to get their hands on real guns for this purpose than to have a gunsmith custom make exact working replicas that can't fire real ammo. There you'd be talking hand-made precision machining with incredibly tight tolerances combined with the artistry involved the outward appearance and the historical accuracy that most films call for.

And if they're going to shoot it out of somebody's hand or smack something with it? They likely took the hero prop, made a mold from it, and cast it in plastic.

And if it's a type of weapon that isn't used that often, they're not going to keep them on hand - they're going to rent them, possibly from a collector.

There are probably middle-ground options. Making blanks in off sizes, then having gunsmiths custom make cylinders, for instance.

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:28 am And in any case, I don’t understand the need for him to distance himself from ‘pulling the trigger’ in this context. I may be being naive, but I don’t think he’s trying to cover his ass.

One of the lawsuits he's facing was filed by the script supervisor and, iirc, makes the claim that he is personally at fault because the script didn't call for him to pull the trigger in the scene that they were rehearsing. If that is correct, it might explain why he is explicitly saying that he didn't do that (i.e. he is responding to a specific accusation).

Is this rare or weird or hard to explain enough to consider…nastier explanations?

Certainly not my first thought, or even 21st, about this, but Baldwin has made some pretty powerful enemies…one in particular who apparently hates being mocked or made fun of more than anything else.

Bo Duke has spoken

"Three weeks ago, it was a prop gun. Four weeks ago, nobody knew how in the world this real weapon was loaded on the set," Schneider said. "Today, he didn't pull the trigger."

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:55 am Is this rare or weird or hard to explain enough to consider…nastier explanations?

Certainly not my first thought, or even 21st, about this, but Baldwin has made some pretty powerful enemies…one in particular who apparently hates being mocked or made fun of more than anything else.

Holy shit.....that's tinfoil hat material at it's finest.

El Guapo wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:44 am

stimpy wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:08 am Cover his ass as in " The gun shot itself, I had nothing to do with it", even though there has been no indication by anyone that he was told to practice how he pulls, aims and fires the magic gun at the moment he did.

You quoted him as saying he "fired" the blank.
How exactly did he fire it without pulling the trigger, which he is now saying he didnt do?

He's saying that the gun went off when he pulled the hammer down, without him pulling the trigger. As an east coast elitist I have almost no knowledge of how guns work, so I don't know how plausible that is.

If it is anything close to functioning like the Colt SAA it was supposed to be, this is unlikely. I posted a video earlier that shows the sequence of "Colt clicks" these revolvers have. When you pull the hammer back, it ratchets (for lack of a better term). If you let go of the hammer, it's not going to strike the round in the chamber. It's going to return to the previous click. Only when it is fully cocked can it hammer on the primer and then only when the trigger is pulled.

Like McNutt said, trigger weight varies. For single action revolvers, the pull is very light because you have to cock before firing. That acts as kind of a safety so a heavy trigger pull isn't desired. On a double action, the pull is much heavier because it performs the action of cocking as well as releasing the hammer. The heavy pull acts as a safety.

stimpy wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:15 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:55 am Is this rare or weird or hard to explain enough to consider…nastier explanations?

Certainly not my first thought, or even 21st, about this, but Baldwin has made some pretty powerful enemies…one in particular who apparently hates being mocked or made fun of more than anything else.

Holy shit.....that's tinfoil hat material at it's finest.

Agree.

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:55 am Is this rare or weird or hard to explain enough to consider…nastier explanations?

Certainly not my first thought, or even 21st, about this, but Baldwin has made some pretty powerful enemies…one in particular who apparently hates being mocked or made fun of more than anything else.

I have no idea who you're referring to. I don't follow celebrities or celebrity drama. But even if you intentionally loaded the gun he was going to use with live rounds, it wouldn't (normally) go directly into his hands, and a huge number of mistakes would still have to be made to have it still loaded when it got into his hands, and for him to then shoot it and kill someone would require a lot more things to go just right (wrong?)

In other words, it would be a terrible way to get back at someone.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 12:20 pm

Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:55 am Is this rare or weird or hard to explain enough to consider…nastier explanations?

Certainly not my first thought, or even 21st, about this, but Baldwin has made some pretty powerful enemies…one in particular who apparently hates being mocked or made fun of more than anything else.

I have no idea who you're referring to. I don't follow celebrities or celebrity drama. But even if you intentionally loaded the gun he was going to use with live rounds, it wouldn't (normally) go directly into his hands, and a huge number of mistakes would still have to be made to have it still loaded when it got into his hands, and for him to then shoot it and kill someone would require a lot more things to go just right (wrong?)

In other words, it would be a terrible way to get back at someone.

Would [did?] make for a typical plot in something like Murder She Wrote or Colombo.

Max Peck wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:33 am

Unagi wrote: ↑Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:28 am And in any case, I don’t understand the need for him to distance himself from ‘pulling the trigger’ in this context. I may be being naive, but I don’t think he’s trying to cover his ass.

One of the lawsuits he's facing was filed by the script supervisor and, iirc, makes the claim that he is personally at fault because the script didn't call for him to pull the trigger in the scene that they were rehearsing. If that is correct, it might explain why he is explicitly saying that he didn't do that (i.e. he is responding to a specific accusation).

Ok, this makes sense then, as to why he’s making any point about it at all.
Although I would (if I were the jury) never blame him for pulling the trigger, as it was never meant to be ‘a gun’ that could be used to shoot bullets. (Assuming that point is still valid here)

If I were in the jury, I'd be wondering what he meant by 'let go of the hammer' if he didn't pull the trigger.