Right. And who would be in the position to act here with due caution and circumspection before the fatal act? Its not the actor, but the people handling the prop gun prior to the incident.
Then the prosecutor is cruising for an acquittal. Because actors are not on set safety officers and negligent hiring is too far removed from the act for homicide charges.
Because actors are not trained experts in on set safety. They’re actors. They’re job and training is to play make-believe. The crew are the ones who are responsible for ensuring nobody gets hurt/killed while the actors are playing make-believe.
And an actor is not trained to tell the difference between live and dummy ammunition.
So are protocols with prop firearms when you have a professional film crew. But shit happens when corners are cut in anything requiring experts and safety. That doesn’t make it homicide, it makes it civil negligence.
There are rules set by unions & guilds which are enforced under penalty of litigation.
**BTW semi unrelated note. As another sign why Keanu Reeves is the coolest guy in Hollywood,
John Wick movies do not use real or blank firing guns. All of them are Airsoft copies with CGI muzzle flashes put in post production. **
You keep referring to him as an actor, he is, but he also has other roles in the production.
Maybe it’s one of those roles the prosecutor believes did not take proper caution.
Like it’s been said many times, until it goes to trial and we see what evidence the prosecutor has and what theory they are going with all of this speculation is fun but none of us knows what we don’t know.
Because his role as a producer is far too removed for homicide charges. Unless he suddenly took on the role of armorer, prop master or 2nd AD its irrelevant.
Then its prosecutorial abuse of authority. That is an issue for a civil court, not a criminal one.
But maybe there is evidence that we have not seen that says otherwise.
All this speculation, even mine, is silly.
This is the part that I see no excuse for happening.
I know nothing about the legal aspects but I do know safety protocols. In fact I am taking a break from an ISO standards based accreditation checklist right now. (It’s VERY long, and reundancy is the name of the game)
A system that can result in death just has to be set up in the most fault tolerant way possible.
The Keanu example tells me its time to just ban real guns from sets period. A tiny bit of realism isn’t worth the lives it has cost. I am suprised the Unions aren’t screaming about this.
I am not in a position to debate US law but from a moral perspective everyone involved in killing Halyna should be ashamed of themselves and fighitng to make sure this never happens again. (Alec Baldwin in particular)
Sorry to split this into soo many messages.
Asked a SAG member friend (and firearm enthusiast) and he sent me this link for another association.
https://www.actorsequity.org/resources/Producers/safe-and-sanitary/safety-tips-for-use-of-firearms/
To me those guidelines sound like they put responsibility on the actor.
For example:
“Check the firearm every time you take possession of it. Before each use, make sure the gun has been test-fired off stage and then ask to test fire it yourself. Watch the prop master check the cylinders and barrel to be sure no foreign object or dummy bullet has become lodged inside.”
The link is Actor’s Equity, which is the stage actor’s guild. But the concepts are similar.
" All loading of firearms must be done by the property master, armorer or experienced persons working under their direct supervision."
"If asked to point and shoot directly at a living target, consult with the property master or armorer for the prescribed safety procedures."
" * Never attempt to adjust, modify or repair a firearm yourself. If a weapon jams or malfunctions, corrections shall be made only by a qualified person."
Which is negligence, civil liability. It isn’t homicide.
Agreed.
The film unions are giving support for Baldwin. Which is ironic, had Baldwin used a union crew, the incident would never have happened.
In its statement, SAG-AFTRA takes issue with the prosecutor’s line of reasoning.
…
“The guidelines do not make it the performer’s responsibility to check any firearm,” the statement continues. “Performers train to perform, and they are not required or expected to be experts on guns or experienced in their use. The industry assigns that responsibility to qualified professionals who oversee their use and handling in every aspect.
.
It’s been pointed out several times in this thread that the New Mexico law specifically cites negligence in the criminal statute.
As I have pointed out to several people so far, it isn’t Baldwin’s negligence here that directly caused the death. Its a giant stretch to call his negligence as a producer as the reason for homicide charges.
I don’t disagree that there are many people at fault. But I think there is something seriously wrong with a situation where a union for stage actors and screen actors can have such different policies. If stage actors are expected to have a role in gun safety why can’t screen actors?
In general I just don’t see why we cant require anyone holding a gun on a set to have training. I can’t do certain roles at my workplace without targeted safety training and many of those jobs won’t kill someone when performed incorrectly.
On a personal opinion note… I just don’t beleive a union should be able to say that someone has no legal responsibility due to their policies. That should be the courts job.
There are major differences between acting on a stage in a live performance and acting on a movie set. A stage actor can have 5 full performances in the time it takes to film a 10 minute sequence.
You’re arguing against an assertion I did not make. You wrote that negligence can only be a civil infraction; that’s false, at least according to the New Mexico law.
Two points:
1 - this post isn’t about any one poster. We just suspended someone for making that mistake. Please do not do it here.
2 - unless someone has access to non-public information about this specific event, opinions, however informed, are just that, and you are not going to get folks to acquiesce to your position absent facts. “standing your ground” in an attempt to do so on this topic is futile until more facts emerge or more context is given.
Impressive what you can do with a lot of money and a lot of trade secrets
Gary Tuers: It’s complicated. And it’s even more complicated for the John Wick rules. It’s a trade secret for how we do it for the John Wick rules. We’re talking CQB distances. In John Wick 2, they wanted to use the Benelli M2 and historically Hollywood hasn’t been able to get M2s to run very well. More importantly we do a thing for the Wick series where the barrel is completely solid plugged, nothing comes out of the barrel at all. That’s how you’ll see a shot [in JW2] where he sticks a shotgun to a guy’s throat and does the Match Saver [loads the extra round positioned by the ejection port] and shoots him in the throat. I talked them into using an M4. When he’s using an M4 in Italy, that wasn’t the gun that was chosen, that was the gun we could make work.
When I was a kid, and growing up in the south, my mother banned guns in the house. And yet, I still took both a hunter safety course and a gun safety course, because, at the tender age of 5, I might be in a position where I’m around a gun. I was taught how to make the gun safe if I found it, and to get an adult immediately. I wasn’t taught to leave it alone, because a gun left alone will just be found by the next person or child. Growing up around guns we were taught that they aren’t props, they aren’t toys, they are always to be treated as loaded weapons. It stuns me that anyone involved with using guns professionally, even as actors, are not taught the same. This is WHY people like Alec Baldwin end up shooting innocent people, because they did not know how to handle the gun safely. They treated it like it was a toy.
We have a gun violence problem in this country, and some of that violence is done by hateful people with hateful motives, but a LOT more of that violence is done by people like Alec Baldwin and condoned away as “He didn’t know how to know” or “he wasn’t the one whose job it was.” So now we’re in a thread arguing that someone who picked up a loaded gun and fired it at someone , even accidentally, even if they didn’t know the gun was loaded, is somehow “Not Negligent.” That’s like accidentally committing DWI, killing someone, and saying it was the Bartenders fault since THEY handle the liquor.
I don’t know which way the jury goes on this, I suspect it ends up being pleaded out, but if you really want to solve the gun violence problem in this country it’s going to start with teaching people how to safe a gun and how to verify the gun is safe. It’s going to come with people not playing with these things like they’re toys. And it’s going to come with making people who point loaded weapons at people and pull the trigger, accidentally or otherwise, somewhat responsible for that.
I think we aren’t going to come to an agreement on this one.
Especially in slooow motion 
I think the fundamental difference in our viewpoints is that you are coming with knowledge of the system and how its supposed to work.
I am coming from the perspective of if the system can fail and kill someone it’s wrong. I am also coming from the perspective of an industry where things are checked and you always assume the last person could have messed up. In my opinion if safety training and double checks makes the production cost more, and take longer, then so be it. The industry just has to find something else to compromise on. Safety is not the place to save time and money. Even one innocent person dying because a movie needed a gun pointing scene is too many. (And it hasnt been just one)
Anyway off to convince the kids its their bedtime.
From here:
First of all, it’s not his responsibility as an actor to ensure prop safety. There’s somebody on set specifically to do that, who’s an expert. Actors, they’re not even allowed to do that. What people don’t understand is, the Screen Actors Guild, the union, does not allow any producer, anybody, to use an actor for anything on set other than acting. You can’t use an actor to help decorate, to do lights, to do locations. He or she just can act, and that’s it. And there’s a reason for that, because there are other delegable duties that people have on set and that they’re supposed to do. An actor is required to rely upon an armorer, or any other person on set, who’s an expert, when it comes to whether or not a piece of equipment that they’re using is safe.
