I have no experience in the high voltage so I assume the complexities are substantial. I also appreciate that as complexity increases trust just has to be given at some point. (Extreme example Astronauts trust launch control).
However even in these cases there are often systems that may increase safety through involving the less knowledgeable to some degree.
For example, long ago I worked on some 347V equipment. And I would not have been able to tell you if it was safe. However the people who knew what they were doing ran through the lockouts (a literal lock on the breaker) and checks in place before I touched the small part I was removing (which was on the low voltage side of the system). I always assumed that verbal and visual flag run through was for them as well as me.
Systems like this are nice because the end user witnessed the check (even verbally) “I am checking this item… I am confirming it is safe”. IMHO this is subtly but importantly different from a statement “This is safe”.
From a bit of reading it sounds like some armourers do their checks when the weapon is being passed to the actor and ensure that people know it is being checked. This makes way more sense to me than just trusting someone say “Here this is safe”.
The number of failures that occurred on this set are just astonishing. As a currently sleep deprived and delirious parent the feels are extra strong for this poor victims family.
I’m having difficulty trying to understand why dummy bullets need to look like real bullets. Any close-ups that show that much detail should be done off set in better controllable locations?
Also, why a real gun, with a barrel-length hole that will pass, or even chamber, a real bullet? Hollywood is lousy with prop making and special effects folk.
My experience is less with handguns, more with rifles and machine guns (5 years infantry, early '80s), but I agree. Failing to check that my weapon was clear was a serious infraction. Receiving rifle from stores? After watching the supply guy do a pinky check (no round in the chamber) and thumbnail check (to confirm the barrel is clear), I would then repeat the exact same checks myself. And then the reverse when checking the weapon back in. And any time a weapon changed hands. And when done actively shooting, either real or blanks. And over and over again. I think my right pinky is permanently stained from gun oil.
Guns are made to inflict lethal damage. They need to be treated so. Obsessive training and adherence to best practices is key.
For the record, I abhor Trump. I’m not USAian; other than as an 800kg gorilla, US politics is just entertainment for me. And I really like Baldwin. I do think he bears some responsibility, although certainly less than others involved. Especially anyone responsible for cutting corners on safety. I don’t know the details, so I’ll let the appropriate authorities assign blame.
Perhaps some good comes from this. Like finding a way, even if difficult, to not have lethal weapons on movie sets? You frackers put a man on the moon, dammit!
But since it’s gun and USA-related, I’m not holding my breath.
Certainly, it’s possibly to have convincing fakes and then CGI the muzzle flare, although it’s not as easy (or cheap) to make that CGI look convincing as people think. And, of course, there’s a big element of “it’s always been done this way” involved. More and more productions are doing exactly what you suggest and no longer using real weapons on set.
The reason dummies look real is generally for revolvers, where the bullets can be seen from the front of the cylinder. So these are being shot as part of a scene with actors, looking at the front of the weapon. When done properly, these are inert cartridges with powder and primer removed. (Done improperly, you get Brandon Lee.) Based on the many mixed reports, this sounds like they were prepping a shot looking at the front of the gun where Baldwin was drawing and pointing the weapon. It likely should have contained dummy bullets, not blanks.
But none of that appears to be the problem here. A gun being used as a prop appears to have been used for goofing off target shooting outside production hours. Live ammo shouldn’t be near the set, and definitely shouldn’t ever be loaded into a gun being used as a prop. Camera crew should be doing remote viewing when a blank is being fired toward the camera. It sounds like there a lot of serious safety lapses around this set.
You have to keep in mind that some of things you’d never do anywhere else happen when making movies. Actors will point guns at other actors as part of the job. In some cases, those guns will even be loaded with something—it’s just never, ever live rounds. For a long time, there weren’t very convincing alternatives. Now it’s been more inertia. But I think this is going to prompt a lot of productions to move away from using actual guns; that’s a good thing.
How often do you need to see a bullet in a film? Somewhere between never (they never reload) and very seldom (like how often do we need to see someone reloading?)
I don’t believe that real bullets are necessary on set except in really very, very rare circumstances. The first film has just been shot partially in space and yet we have thousands of feature films set in space. What’s so fucking special about guns and bullets?
