Alec Baldwin killed crew member Halyna Hutchins on set of Rust

[Niner Outlaw]

OK. Now we're on the same page. Personally, I think a stiff fine/lawsuit/money to go to the victims family would've been appropriate. And maybe a shitload of community service.

I personally feel that jail time is just not the right punishment for somebody who may have been negligent but obviously meant no harm. The victims family will be better served with a financial payout IMO.

It all just seems so tragic on so many levels.

Baldwin's actions were reckless if he indeed shot the gun at someone when it wasn't in the script, so i think his punishment fits in your post. OTOH, the negligence of the armorer probably warrants some jail time imo b/c of the responsibility placed on them. Baldwin was relying on the armorer to do their job. Not knowing Cali law, I'm not sure how much of the sentenced time the armorer will actually serve.

 

[redskinsfan1963]

baldwin,s full of shit saying he never pointed a gun at somebody when he,s on film doing it.

 

[Battlelyon]

Baldwin, the shooter, doesn’t really deserve a serious punishment. He should be hit for being reckless, but as the shooter, I think he was relying on the armourer.

Baldwin, the producer, however, should have the book thrown at him. He is the one who hired a discount, inexperienced armourer and then proceeded to cut budgets to the point where no support was given to the crew to effectively do their jobs.

And then going off script during a scene involving a gun. That ignores all safety protocols.

 

[sharkymcwrath]

You are scum for advocating for letting him get away with it.

Thanks!

 

[sharkymcwrath]

Do you think drunk drivers mean to harm? Not in general but a certain level of negligence should be criminal. Pointing a gun at a person, especially not knowing if the gun is loaded, and pulling the trigger arises to that level. There is not much difference on how I feel about either.

The gun was not supposed to be loaded so in theory he knew the gun wasn't loaded.

 

[Niner Outlaw]

The gun was not supposed to be loaded so in theory he knew the gun wasn't loaded.

And, imo, it is that distinction that makes his actions reckless or some lesser mens rea than negligent and thereby warranting a significantly lesser punishment than the armorer.

 

[batchaps4me]

The gun was not supposed to be loaded so in theory he knew the gun wasn't loaded.

If he knew it was unloaded, how did it fire a round and kill a person?

 

[sharkymcwrath]

If he knew it was unloaded, how did it fire a round and kill a person?

Because shit happened. Money over jail time IMO and that ain't going to change unless they can come up with some proof that the guy is a murderous asshole. Money will serve the victims family far better than watching a person with no ill intent go to prison.

I don't know a lot about Baldwin but he sure did something long before this to rub some of you wrong. Many of you had him guilty the day it happened.

 

[batchaps4me]

Yup and most drunk drivers make it home and go to bed and don't hurt anyone.

Most people that negligently handle firearms do as well.

 

[batchaps4me]

Because shit happened.

And that shit was caused directly by Alec's negligence. He didn't know the gun was unloaded and he did not care.

 

[batchaps4me]

Baldwin's actions were reckless if he indeed shot the gun at someone when it wasn't in the script, so i think his punishment fits in your post. OTOH, the negligence of the armorer probably warrants some jail time imo b/c of the responsibility placed on them. Baldwin was relying on the armorer to do their job. Not knowing Cali law, I'm not sure how much of the sentenced time the armorer will actually serve.

I agree on the armorer and director/assistant that handed the gun to Alec and claimed it clear. The bagman is as guilty of robbing a bank as the gunman and driver.

 

[Niner Outlaw]

I agree on the armorer and director/assistant that handed the gun to Alec and claimed it clear. The bagman is as guilty of robbing a bank as the gunman and driver.

I sort of agree and sort of don't. Maybe I don't understand your post.

Suppose this whole situation is recorded. If I hand handle and load a gun and hand it to you and tell you it's empty and you immediately point it at someone, pull the trigger and kill them, I am MORE liable than you B/c I know or should have know that the gun was loaded with live rounds and you didn't. I should get a harsher punishment than you. Just as the armorer should get a harsher punishment than Baldwin.

 

[batchaps4me]

I sort of agree and sort of don't. Maybe I don't understand your post.

Suppose this whole situation is recorded. If I hand handle and load a gun and hand it to you and tell you it's empty and you immediately point it at someone, pull the trigger and kill them, I am MORE liable than you B/c I know or should have know that the gun was loaded with live rounds and you didn't. I should get a harsher punishment than you. Just as the armorer should get a harsher punishment than Baldwin.

Our disconnect is that I believe anyone that is going to handle, own or operate a gun is responsible for the safe use of that gun. This is not a case of someone that has never used a gun on the movie set. This is a paid professional that over a course of his career has dozens of movies where he is firing guns. He knows from documented training and experience that even an unloaded gun is never pointed at someone, much less to pull the trigger when doing so. This is the most basic and fundamental rule in gun safety, verify it is not loaded and still treat it like it is. For a trained professional that has decades of experience handling firearms in movies, you cannot convince me that he didn't or even shouldn't have known the most basic firearm safety rules.

 

[Pure Steel]

Looks guilty…..

 

[eaglesnut]

Thanks!

I do know best

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Baldwin, the shooter, doesn’t really deserve a serious punishment. He should be hit for being reckless, but as the shooter, I think he was relying on the armourer.

Baldwin, the producer, however, should have the book thrown at him. He is the one who hired a discount, inexperienced armourer and then proceeded to cut budgets to the point where no support was given to the crew to effectively do their jobs.

I've said this from the beginning.
Baldwin the actor shouldnt get in trouble.

Baldwin the Producer should absolutely be held accountable.
He was the one to cut corners. He was the one that got rid of the actual experienced guy to save money with the inexperienced.
The negligence as the man in charge is definitely on him. His reckless decision on safety is what led to this person's death.

 

[Wazmankg]

Of course not, but it warrants some accountability.

As the producer in a civil case I agree. But criminal liabilty? Nah. It was her damned job to insure the gun was safe. I'll be shocked if Baldwin isn't quickly cleared by any jury that hears the case.

 

[Wazmankg]

Because shit happened. Money over jail time IMO and that ain't going to change unless they can come up with some proof that the guy is a murderous asshole. Money will serve the victims family far better than watching a person with no ill intent go to prison.

I don't know a lot about Baldwin but he sure did something long before this to rub some of you wrong. Many of you had him guilty the day it happened.

Baldwin is a lefty and he's an asshole, so that's the math and respect to you as a conservative who sees this clearly.

 

[DonMan]

An attorney once told me "more people are in jail for murder because juries thought they were liars than there are because they actually killed somebody".

Anyone on trial in a criminal case who the jury views as someone who didn't tell the truth about some critical aspect of the case could be convicted.

I haven't followed this all that closely, but I'm under the impression that there are certain aspects of Baldwin's "version" that simply can't be true.