The right wing gun dorks really froth about this one, and it's honestly the right reaction. Alec Baldwin is a big liberal anti-gunner, and yet here he was making a movie with gunplay and treating live guns like toys. The very thing liberal anti-gunners believe all gun people do. To anyone who owns or has shot guns, it should seem bugfuck crazy to trust someone else handing you a gun telling you it's safe to point it at a living being and pull the trigger. You check it. Every time a gun gets into your hands, you check it for safety.
To anyone who owns or has shot guns, it should seem bugfuck crazy to trust someone else handing you a gun telling you it’s safe to point it at a living being and pull the trigger. You check it.
To anyone who owns or has shot guns, it's crazy to do that even if you did check it. It violates more than one of the main rules. You treat it as if it's loaded even if you think it isn't. You never point it at anything you don't want to destroy. If someone tells you to point it at them or someone else you say no.
There's no reason you couldn't use a fake gun for this lol
It’s not the job of the actor to be a firearms expert. They go through safety training, but the point of the armorer is that they do trust that the gun is safe. With Alec Baldwin, the gun was supposed to be loaded with a dummy round but was loaded with a live round. Some dummy rounds look almost exactly the same as a live round. Even if he did check it the chances are he probably wouldn’t have noticed.
It’s not the job of the actor to be a firearms expert.
Yeah, this is kind of what I mean. They don't need to be an expert but they sure do need to know the rules of gun safety and be well enough trained to check that the gun is actually safely loaded.
Guns are serious, there's no space for people to handle them unseriously.
actors do research for roles all the time. it is absolutely their job to know how to handle a firearm if that's part of a character they're playing. beyond that, anyone who refuses to learn gun safety should be banned from touching a firearm, ever.
It’s not the job of the actor to be a firearms expert.
It is, however, the job of the production company to hire a competent armourer. And if they knowingly hire a cut-rate armourer with a proven history of dangerous safety violations, the production company's owner ought to be held responsible. Alec Baldwin is the owner of the film's production company.
It's the number one basic rule of gun safety: don't point a gun at something you don't want to shoot. It's not hard. If you need to break the most cardinal law of gun safety for a film production, you better know what the fuck you are doing.
:10000-com: :10000-com:
The right wing gun dorks really froth about this one, and it's honestly the right reaction. Alec Baldwin is a big liberal anti-gunner, and yet here he was making a movie with gunplay and treating live guns like toys. The very thing liberal anti-gunners believe all gun people do. To anyone who owns or has shot guns, it should seem bugfuck crazy to trust someone else handing you a gun telling you it's safe to point it at a living being and pull the trigger. You check it. Every time a gun gets into your hands, you check it for safety.
To anyone who owns or has shot guns, it's crazy to do that even if you did check it. It violates more than one of the main rules. You treat it as if it's loaded even if you think it isn't. You never point it at anything you don't want to destroy. If someone tells you to point it at them or someone else you say no.
There's no reason you couldn't use a fake gun for this lol
I think the honest reason to not use fakes is the fakes probably cost way more than an everyday Uberti reproduction
What are talking about? Peepaw taught me on Facebook that you should point your loaded gun at your sack to own the libs
Not the kind of bottom surgery i'm going for, but people should have options.
Ehh I'd recommend it for transphobes
fake guns don't fire blanks.
:large-adult-son:
sometimes you just gotta make a bright loud flash and tape small explosives to a guy :eric-andre:
It’s not the job of the actor to be a firearms expert. They go through safety training, but the point of the armorer is that they do trust that the gun is safe. With Alec Baldwin, the gun was supposed to be loaded with a dummy round but was loaded with a live round. Some dummy rounds look almost exactly the same as a live round. Even if he did check it the chances are he probably wouldn’t have noticed.
Yeah, this is kind of what I mean. They don't need to be an expert but they sure do need to know the rules of gun safety and be well enough trained to check that the gun is actually safely loaded.
Guns are serious, there's no space for people to handle them unseriously.
it is always the job of the guy holding a gun to be careful not to kill people with the gun.
actors do research for roles all the time. it is absolutely their job to know how to handle a firearm if that's part of a character they're playing. beyond that, anyone who refuses to learn gun safety should be banned from touching a firearm, ever.
Did you not read what I wrote, they do safety training.
And no, it is absolutely not their job to be firearms experts. That’s the SAG and IATSE position on it as well.
i did, i just also read what someone else wrote, which is that he skipped it apparently?
that's nice that IATSE and SAG feel that way. i disagree with their position and stand by what i said :shrug-outta-hecks:
It is, however, the job of the production company to hire a competent armourer. And if they knowingly hire a cut-rate armourer with a proven history of dangerous safety violations, the production company's owner ought to be held responsible. Alec Baldwin is the owner of the film's production company.
It's the number one basic rule of gun safety: don't point a gun at something you don't want to shoot. It's not hard. If you need to break the most cardinal law of gun safety for a film production, you better know what the fuck you are doing.