Alec Baldwin Shooting

I thought we had already started a thread on this but I guess not

this guy I agree with, especially on the safety issues. He says he did not want to expand on his opinion about whether the gun could have been fired without pulling the trigger ... but is free to do so now due to the FBI finding. So let me say I agree if the FBI is right, which we assume.

But .... yep there's a 'but.'

I'm wondering now if all modern revolvers can't be fired without pulling the trigger ... I have assumed one I have could be, because the hammer when pulling it back, but not fully cocking it, then releasing it, springs back. For it not to have a chance of firing, would have to mean the firing pin isn't contacted in that circumstance, which frankly I can hardly believe. If the pin is hit, there's always a chance, even if a harder strike on the pin is desirable. Now, I don't understand why this is not discussed in his video... that creates the 'but'.

he seems to be showing that the movie set gun is not even double action. That suggest to me it's not modern design, but i guess a replica could be partly modern, partly throwback.

I'll have to test my gun, maybe today

update:

on my revolver, once you get very far in pulling back the hammer, the cylinder starts to turn. Once that starts, letting the hammer go can't accidentally cause a discharge. You can pull it back about a quarter inch before the cylinder starts turning. Now I would say the light tap that the firing pin could get at that point might not even move it ... if so firing is impossible. If it can move a little, now we can question the phrase "impossible that it could fire" but it might be that it can be shown that this would never even touch the percussion cap on the cartridge.

The guy in the video doesn't explain all this. I find that puzzling.

Quote: odiousgambit

update:

on my revolver, once you get very far in pulling back the hammer, the cylinder starts to turn. Once that starts, letting the hammer go can't accidentally cause a discharge. You can pull it back about a quarter inch before the cylinder starts turning. Now I would say the light tap that the firing pin could get at that point might not even move it ... if so firing is impossible. If it can move a little, now we can question the phrase "impossible that it could fire" but it might be that it can be shown that this would never even touch the percussion cap on the cartridge.

The guy in the video doesn't explain all this. I find that puzzling.

I’m not a firearms expert but it is my understanding that most modern revolvers have a mechanism called a transfer bar that prevents firing without a trigger pull. When the hammer is at rest there is a gap between the hammer and the firing pin. When the trigger is pulled, the transfer bar moves to fill the gap.

Quote: JimRockford

I’m not a firearms expert but it is my understanding that most modern revolvers have a mechanism called a transfer bar that prevents firing without a trigger pull. When the hammer is at rest there is a gap between the hammer and the firing pin. When the trigger is pulled, the transfer bar moves to fill the gap.

I'm not an expert either, and you're probably right that at least with modern guns something like this is the case

assuming Alec did not intend to shoot two people, and was trying to relate what happened, what did he do? I'm suspecting he pulled the trigger and tried to control the hammer drop and failed, but didn't want to admit the pulled trigger part

OR... just felt assured it was a totally safe gun and was careless as hell, making up a story that didn't happen

I'm going to see if I can in some way get my gun to fire by hammer slip without the trigger being pulled. If I use both hands, as the cylinder turns I'll complete the turn of the cylinder to the next 'click'. Maybe this transfer bar will still prevent firing

He was being given directions while he was doing this. Hard to believe he was really even paying that much attention to trigger pulling at least until the gun went off.

My read on the case is that the director was trying to frame the scene and making sure Alec was on camera, good lighting, etc.
If the gun doesn't go off before shooting the scene, I am sure that Alec was supposed to pull the trigger during the scene.
The scene evidently called for the camera to be looking directly at Alec when he pulls the trigger and the "blank" round goes off,
At least that is what it looks like they were setting up for as the director was looking through the camera at Baldwin during set up.
No one seems to be saying the trigger was never supposed to be pulled during the scene.
No one is saying the gun wasn't supposed to be pointed at the camera during the scene.
It was only a matter of timing as to when someone was going to get shot or killed.
Once the Armorer mixed up the live rounds with the blanks, it was fait accompli
You can argue Alec should have re-checked the gun, but like most Lefties, he barely knew which end of the gun to hold,
And you expect him to know what a live round vs. a blank round looks like? This guy was clearly not a gun guy.
You can tell that based on his pointing the gun at someone when it wasn't necessary & pulling the trigger during rehearsal.
Any trained individual would only complete either of those actions when absolutely necessary during live filming.
He definitely pulled the trigger, whether he remembers pulling it or not. But no one should hold him primarily responsible.
If he didn't shoot someone during rehearsal, he was definitely going to shoot someone during filming. The Armorer made sure of that.

the armorer ...... honest to god, I hate sound like the old-style oppressor of females, but, well, check it out and you tell me if she sounds like the person for the job

video set at the right spot

https://youtu.be/YcP4ZjX_S70?t=157

Quote: JCW09

My read on the case is that the director was trying to frame the scene and making sure Alec was on camera, good lighting, etc.
If the gun doesn't go off before shooting the scene, I am sure that Alec was supposed to pull the trigger during the scene.
The scene evidently called for the camera to be looking directly at Alec when he pulls the trigger and the "blank" round goes off,
At least that is what it looks like they were setting up for as the director was looking through the camera at Baldwin during set up.
No one seems to be saying the trigger was never supposed to be pulled during the scene.
No one is saying the gun wasn't supposed to be pointed at the camera during the scene.
It was only a matter of timing as to when someone was going to get shot or killed.
Once the Armorer mixed up the live rounds with the blanks, it was fait accompli
You can argue Alec should have re-checked the gun, but like most Lefties, he barely knew which end of the gun to hold,
And you expect him to know what a live round vs. a blank round looks like? This guy was clearly not a gun guy.
You can tell that based on his pointing the gun at someone when it wasn't necessary & pulling the trigger during rehearsal.
Any trained individual would only complete either of those actions when absolutely necessary during live filming.
He definitely pulled the trigger, whether he remembers pulling it or not. But no one should hold him primarily responsible.
If he didn't shoot someone during rehearsal, he was definitely going to shoot someone during filming. The Armorer made sure of that.

I feel sorry for Alec for reasons you pointed out. He had no idea the gun would have actually went off. Gun should have been CGI, and this whole mess would have been avoided.

Don't get me wrong, I don't feel sorry for him. He should have checked the gun and known what he was doing.
He didn't. He isn't primarily responsible, but he isn't without blame either. He gets to live with the mistake, that is punishment enough.
Although to be honest, when you see him interact with the Public, I tend to think if it had to happen to someone, well, karma.

Quote: JCW09

Don't get me wrong, I don't feel sorry for him. He should have checked the gun and known what he was doing.
He didn't. He isn't primarily responsible, but he isn't without blame either. He gets to live with the mistake, that is punishment enough.
Although to be honest, when you see him interact with the Public, I tend to think if it had to happen to someone, well, karma.

Do you think he would have even known the difference between blank rounds and live rounds even if he did check the gun?

I don't know anything about Alec Baldwins firearms history, but I would guess he (and the vast majority of actors) would not have a clue what a live round looks like versus a blank round (they will just see the metal round in the chamber). Whoever prepared the gun (the armorer) is more responsible.

Are actors supposed to check their horses to make sure they don't have some aggressive disease that will cause them to attack somebody nearby? How much knowledge of what they are doing on screen with every random prop are they really supposed to have, or are the experts (animal wranglers, armorers, vehicle experts, etc....)? If they are driving a military vehicle and there is a massive blowout and the debris kills somebody, are they responsible for not checking the tires before getting in the driver's seat?

Ultimately the equipment expert needs to be responsible and the director/producer or whoever sets the safety policies and checklists on the given set.