If we assume that: * The CNN link tells the entire story (a very risky assumption for any news report * There was a second armourer that also verified the gun was cold before passing it on to Baldwin * No corners were cut in examining the prop manager's qualifications before hiring her And probably other assumptions, though I can't think of any off-hand. Leaving out either of those latter two points could amount to negligence on the part of one or more executives for the film, which could include Baldwin. It may also end up not including him, if those decisions were made entirely by other executives or some level of middle manager. I did not in any way ignore your link, I just recognized that it's nothing close to a conclusive exoneration. I encourage you to do the same. The armourer named in it is likely to end up being the one most immediately responsible for this, but the investigation will have to pan out in order to determine the full extent of everyone's culpability.
I misread it originally. He grabbed a random gun off a table without confirming if it was ready to be used or not. It is the assistant's fault.
DirtBasedSoap posted...
i have no idea if this is real or not but holy shit if it is
They purposely cut off whoever posted it. Completely made up.
adjl posted...
Which doesn't surprise me, hence I brought it up as an assumption we shouldn't be making.
That said, I wouldn't think you'd need much by way of experience or qualifications to know not to bring live ammo onto a set. As much as I hate to armchair armourer (... armchairourer?), that seems like extremely basic common sense.
A never shot a gun but I assume a real bullet might be used for scenes that require it to be aimed at something that isn't alive. ---
