The Unloaded Gun

[bassjam]

Expertise is not the requirement. It is incumbent upon anyone who handles an item known to be potentially dangerous, and firearms meet that description, to know how to do so safely. In the case of firearms, that means to be able to check whether it is loaded, to not point it in a dangerous manner, and to not press the trigger except when it is appropriate.

The occupation of the operator is irrelevant, as is the purpose for which the item is being used.

That won't cut it.

When there are people who cannot safely handle an item that is known to be inherently dangerous, it is necessary to secure such items and keep such people from handling them.

We do that at home; it is done in gun stores; and it is done at ranges and around the campfire.

It's easy to be an armchair expert, isn't it? Like I said, an actor likely doesn't know what he doesn't know. It's easy for you to sit back and attempt to "educate" us on the forums, but I suggest you go do so in Hollywood since you seem so sure of how things should be done and let us know how that works out for you. And I'll be rooting for you, but I suspect you'll get a lot of pushback and find it not so easy to do things "the right way".

 

[pharmer]

I have exactly zero facts like everyone else, but I'll go out on a limb and SPECULATE that since the film is set in the 1880's time frame, the gun was a single action of some make. Joe

 

[Reloadron]

I do firearms videos for a local museum. I've had posters ridicule me for checking every firearm every time I handle it. "Do you think someone snuck in and loaded the gun when you weren't looking?"

No, I don't think that but I've never had a negligent discharge either. And some of the people who watch aren't gun people, so the message is safety first, last, and always.

Well figure it this way. I would be the first to ridicule you if every time you did not check the gun. Better to be ridiculed by them than me.

Ron

 

[orpington]

I have exactly zero facts like everyone else, but I'll go out on a limb and SPECULATE that since the film is set in the 1880's time frame, the gun was a single action of some make. Joe

Not necessarily. The Colt Models 1877 and 1878 are DA revolvers and date from the late 1870’s.

 

[Kleanbore]

It's easy to be an armchair expert, isn't it?

I described what counts under the law in New Mexico, and I think, everywhere else in the country.

 

[kneedtospeed]

Strange censorship going on previous comments. Maybe many others as well. Regardless, if you dont automatically check every firearm you pickup, before handling it, there is no blame game. Any ad/nd is your baby.

 

[Odd Job]

It's easy for us to ridicule and judge, because we were lucky fortunate enough to be taught the correct way. And we all know people who know a few things about guns who are still incredibly unsafe, so it's not hard to imagine an actor who knows nothing about firearms not even knowing what he's doing wrong. That's why there's supposed to be an expert on the set to handle the safety for him. It's hard for us on a firearms forum to imagine NOT checking a firearms ourselves, but imagine if it was something else handed to them that you know nothing about. If I was handed a grenade or a stick of dynamite on a movie set I'd need to rely on someone else to tell me it's a prop, because there's no way I'd know myself.

I can't really expect an actor to go become an expert with any tool he/she handles or task he/she does either. Because first it's a week of firearms training, then 4 weeks of fencing, then a year of ballet, or 3 months of race car driving, or 5 weeks of handling a chef's knife, or a year learning to be a pilot. Some actors do go through training on their own when they want to make something appear more realistic, but that's not the norm and I don't think it's realistic to expect that to be the norm. It's easier to just have an expert consultant nearby.

Correct, that's the way I see it too.

 

[Reloadron]

Many decades ago, the son of a business friend of my dad was in a school play about the Revolutionary War. They had some old flintlock muskets from the period for use as props.

The kids were playing with them when one discharged, striking a boy in the leg. Fortunately, the wound was minor.

Back in the 1960s, a friend who worked part time in a sporting goods shop had two Ruger Super Blackhawk revolvers. One was kept loaded in the bedroom. The other lived in a western belt rig and came out on Saturday nights as the owner tried to outdraw James Arness and Arvo Ojala. His wife strongly disapproved.

One time, the big CRT color TV disintegrated, some bricks and insulation behind it blew out on the yard, and much of the big picture window came down in shards. Wrong gun! My temporarily completely deafened friend next saw a pantomime of his angry wife screaming and gesturing at him.

The guy who ran behind the gun counter at the store repeated over and over that Marshal Dillon's livin' room deppity should not be allowed to own a gun.

Some days later, the gun counter guy was unboxing some new Remington 870s. He checked each shouldered it, and pressed the trigger before putting it in the rack.

BLAM!

The butt-stocks of several Browning A-5s in the upper rack were destroyed. The man took them to the Browning repair facility in Arnold, MO. He related what had happened, without owning up to the responsibility.

The guy at Browning said "that guy should never be allowed to touch a gun".

There is a reason for the saying "treat every gun...".

Moving away from a tragedy in Hollywood which I see as the result of a perfect storm and back to the main topic.

I had a good friend now deceased who years ago removed his unloaded .380 ACP from his safe, squeezed the trigger and promptly shot and killed his new Dillon reloading scale. Naturally he was embarrassed about it. I suggested he send the scale to Dillon and they may replace it free of charge. He balked not wanting to be further embarrassed. OK, then give me the dead scale and I'll send it in, I have no pride. Rather than give me the dead scale he did send it in and they sent him a new scale. I doubt he ever failed to check a gun again after that incident.

My wife's cousin was visiting us from Arizona when her husband called. He managed to discharge his Ruger 10/22 in the house because his unloaded rifle went bang. That little .22 LR bullet went through a simple wall (two sheets of drywall) which was no big deal yet. Unfortunately it continued and hit a cherished antique mirror belonging to my wife's cousin. That's two unloaded guns so far.

So on a quiet Sunday morning I was at my then favorite indoor range. Very quiet with a law enforcement class doing live fire on the six stall private range (members only). So I am standing there talking to my friend Emery who was working the range. The class exits the range and files across the room and into the classroom. Then comes the bang. I look at Emery, Emery looks at me and yells "are you guys OK in there and what the hell just happened"? About then we heard the instructor go full ballistic. A student in the back of the room discharged his weapon and the round sailed right up the column right between rows of student heads. I guess that gun was also unloaded.

These are just a few of my own personal experiences. All were a result of negligence and nothing accidental about any of them. Gun safety rules and protocols are in place for a reason.

Ron

 

[Kleanbore]

Just over a decade ago, I took a training course with the Texas Defensive Shooting Association, if I remember the name correctly. Most of the course involved shooting hundreds of rounds at steel plates.

The course also covered drawing and presentation--with empty guns.

I was chosen to show how it is done. Three instructors came up close and asked me to show that my gun was empty. I cleared it, with three men watching up close and personal. Then each of them took the gun and checked it while being observed by the others. My .45 was returned to me, and I checked it again and holstered it.

Two instructors stood very close to me--close enough to grab me. Another stepped in front of me and told me to draw and point at him.

Nothing doing! "What's the matter, we've checked it, haven't we?"

The instructors then asked the class how many of them would have passed the test! Whew.

One of the men was an instructor for a Canadian movie company. Said that was his major focus.

We've all seen actors point guns at each other on screen. I do not know the special protocols for that. But attorney Andrew Branca tells thus that if an ND harms someone on a movie set, the shooter is culpable, and there is no legal defense.

 

[armydog]

Expertise is not the requirement. It is incumbent upon anyone who handles an item known to be potentially dangerous, and firearms meet that description, to know how to do so safely. In the case of firearms, that means to be able to check whether it is loaded, to not point it in a dangerous manner, and to not press the trigger except when it is appropriate.

The occupation of the operator is irrelevant, as is the purpose for which the item is being used.

I don't see a jury being sympathetic to anyone trying to weasel their way out of being responsible. No doubt Baldwin will try to use some Affluenza defense and claim he wasn't the expert in charge.... if it even get's that far.

 

[kmw1954]

Sorry if I keep referring back to the range rules we have in place were I work but many of the stories I see here just reinforce those rules to no end.

Another of which is that all firearms must be cased when brought onto the range. once on the range all firearms must be uncased on the shooting bench, NOT on the floor or chair and the muzzle must be pointed down range. If the muzzle is not pointed down range then close the case and turn it around so that the muzzle is pointed down range.

This rule is explained to every patron when they purchase their range pass and is told to them again before they enter the range by the RO. Still it would absolutely amaze you all how many people completely disregard that instruction. How many will open the case and the barrel is pointed at the parking lot or at my chest and when told to stop they will look at you like what is your problem. The ignore the STOP command and continue to remove the gun, flagging who knows how many people.

When confronted they always reply, SORRY, it's not loaded. I then point down the line and tell them to explain that to everyone on the line he just flagged. If I still get the LOOK, I then ask them how they feel about the guy 3 benched down turning and pointing his gun at him! The look usually soon goes away.

On this facility we have four ranges; 25yd, 50yd, 100yd and 200/300yd, The makeup of these ranges are this. 300yd has 12 benches, 100yd has 44 benches, the 50yd has also six 25yd benches, 24 50yd benches and 6 rimfire plinking benches. The 25yd range has 22 benches and at times turns into the Wild West the way some handle hand guns. On a weekend it is not uncommon to have all the ranges full or near full.

Sorry folks but I feel it is a fair rule and helps keep everyone on the line safe. If you all feel this rule is ridiculous or unneeded then please go elsewhere. Or better yet, come work a couple weekends with me!

 

[armydog]

It's easy to be an armchair expert, isn't it? Like I said, an actor likely doesn't know what he doesn't know. It's easy for you to sit back and attempt to "educate" us on the forums, but I suggest you go do so in Hollywood since you seem so sure of how things should be done and let us know how that works out for you. And I'll be rooting for you, but I suspect you'll get a lot of pushback and find it not so easy to do things "the right way".

So people in Hollywood are expected to be less responsible when handling real firearms that can fire real bullets? They have a handicap? Who's job is it to make sure the actor is supposed to know what he should know? Is that who we could expect to be charged if there are any charges? I can see your outrage if we're taking about some child actor on a set but he's not a kid and is 100% responsible for what comes out of that barrel and where it hits and there is no one else responsible for it.

 

[armoredman]

If anyone tells me, "Oh it's not loaded", I'll simply ask them if they are Alec Baldwin..

 

[TomJ]

John Schneider summed it up best. In this day and age there’s no reason to have real guns on a movie set. They can add whatever special effects they need at a later date using computers. Think of what they can do with special effects today. If they have the technology to fake that they can use plastic guns and easily fake shooting in the movie.

In regards to checking guns to make sure they’re not loaded, checking a gun I was sure was unloaded before dry firing it saved me from shooting a hole in my floor. I checked out of habit to find a round was chambered. Given that it takes seconds to confirm whether a gun is loaded I can’t understand why someone wouldn’t do it.

 

[old lady new shooter]

It's easy to be an armchair expert, isn't it? Like I said, an actor likely doesn't know what he doesn't know. It's easy for you to sit back and attempt to "educate" us on the forums, but I suggest you go do so in Hollywood since you seem so sure of how things should be done and let us know how that works out for you. And I'll be rooting for you, but I suspect you'll get a lot of pushback and find it not so easy to do things "the right way".

Without being a firearms expert, he still knows a gun is an inherently dangerous object. I highly recommend Andrew Branca's detailed legal analysis, which concludes that based on the facts and circumstances now known, under New Mexico law Baldwin is clearly guilty of felony involuntary manslaughter. In case you or others here are not familiar with him, Branca is a leading authority on firearms law:

 

[old lady new shooter]

If anyone tells me, :"Oh it's not loaded", I'll simply ask them if they are Alec Baldwin..

I love it.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Not necessarily. The Colt Models 1877 and 1878 are DA revolvers and date from the late 1870’s.

DA or SA, doesn't matter. If DA a revolver has a long heavy trigger pull, it doesn't go off by itself. If SA it has to be cocked, which is a different action than pulling the trigger but requires the same amount of force. Baldwin had to perform a physical action in order for the gun to fire.

 

[old lady new shooter]

I can see your outrage if we're taking about some child actor on a set

The so-called armorer gave a gun to an 11-year-old on her last job.

 

[old lady new shooter]

Correct, that's the way I see it too.

Aside from the fact that this is not a legal justification, consider the following idea: The actor has to be trained how to hold and manipulate the gun to realistically look like he is shooting it. If so, he can equally be trained how to check whether it is loaded.

 

[rdmercer]

In 1975 I watched 90% of Breakheart Pass being filmed here in Idaho. Yakima Canutt was in charge of all stunts and he did most if not all of the checks to see the guns used were not loaded with live rounds. It appeared that the guns were all period correct and not rubber fake. Even famous western actor Ben Johnson involved himself into the armorer job along with Yakima and he probably knew more about guns than any man on any movie set in that time period. Very interesting to watch these professionals at work who did films with John Wayne clear back into the 40s. Thought I would share that history tidbit.

 

[armydog]

The so-called armorer gave a gun to an 11-year-old on her last job.

I know some of this stuff is too outrageous to even make up, and the more info, the worse it will probably be as the full story gets out, but Alec Baldwin is not an 11 year old.

Although his past tantrums are worse than an 11 year olds. lol

 

[old lady new shooter]

I know some of this stuff is too outrageous to even make up, and the more info, the worse it will probably be as the full story gets out, but Alec Baldwin is not an 11 year old.

Although his past tantrums are worse than an 11 year olds. lol

Also the AD had previous firearm-related safety complaints against him.

 

[orpington]

DA or SA, doesn't matter. If DA a revolver has a long heavy trigger pull, it doesn't go off by itself. If SA it has to be cocked, which is a different action than pulling the trigger but requires the same amount of force. Baldwin had to perform a physical action in order for the gun to fire.

If the producers were aware of the history of firearms and were producing a period accurate movie, if set in the 1880’s, they could have just as easily selected a DA revolver for civilian usage as a SA revolver. Of course, by the 1880’s, there was a multitude of makes available, both in SA and DA. However, if one was a civilian, and were to use a Colt revolver, statistically they were MORE likely to have a DA revolver available for them than a SA revolver. To make things simple, I will use total production figures at the start of 1892, when the Cavalry Model had ceased to be produced, this production ending in 1891. Colt SAA production totaled approximately 144,000 ivy 1892. When you subtract out military (Cavalry Model) production, which ended with seri number 140,361,this being 37,060 in production, 103,301 Colt SAA revolvers had been produced for civilian use by the end of military production just before 1892. (Of course, some Cavalry Model revolvers had been stolen or lost along the way, but these numbers are negligible.). In contrast, the Colt Model 1877 and 1878 revolvers were both double action and civilian production. By 1892, 85,400 Colt Model 1877 revolvers had been produced, as well as 29,500 Model 1878 revolvers, the sum total being 114,900. So, statistically, if a period correct film was being produced involving Civilian production of a Colt revolver, Alec Baldwin should have been using a DA revolver, which, of course, can also be fired in single action mode.

 

[orpington]

Also, if the movie was to take place in the 1880’s, let’s say 1885, and the grandfather played by Alec Baldwin was the same age as Baldwin in 1885, he would have been born circa 1822. Probably had firearms from young adulthood more likely than newer stuff, so a Smith & Wesson No 2 Army, a Colt 1849, 1851, 1860, or 1861 or a cartridge conversion seem like logical choices.

 

[Odd Job]

Aside from the fact that this is not a legal justification, consider the following idea: The actor has to be trained how to hold and manipulate the gun to realistically look like he is shooting it. If so, he can equally be trained how to check whether it is loaded.

For some films they might train the actor how to shoot as realistically as they can. Keanu Reeves in John Wick is one example. The 1995 film "Heat" is another, where they got "Andy McNab" to advise De Niro and Pacino how to handle guns. The epic shoot-out scene is all the better for it. But that doesn't mean they will pay those advisors for every movie and it doesn't necessarily follow that you can clear a gun just because you can fire it. I can pick up any blank-firer, aim it in a certain direction and pull the trigger. Doesn't mean I can unload the gun, inspect all the cartridges, decide if they are correct and reload the gun correctly. I can't assume a prop gun on set is the same as a real gun. It may be modified such that the original manual for that gun no longer applies.