Prop Safety on Movie Sets?

[Avocado Diaboli]

10 hours ago, Beerzerker said:

1: Hold on there - Don't go generalizing EVERYONE that's pro-gun (Choice) as being that way.
I am and I'm not doing that.

I'm not saying every pro-gun person is doing that. But from the reactions I've seen, it's largely pro-gun people digging up tweets by Baldwin about gun control and use those to juxtapose that and the accident. I haven't seen any anti-gun people use this incident as a means to propel political discourse over gun control.

 

7 hours ago, JZStudios said:

Rule #1 of ANY firearm. It's ALWAYS loaded and it WILL kill anything you point it at. You're making conjecture to argue for no reason. Children with Nerf and Airsoft understand this rule.

And that part about me laying out why an actor who gets handed a gun and reportedly told it was safe wouldn't have any reason to assume it was a real loaded firearm on a movie set completely went by you?

 

7 hours ago, JZStudios said:

The only people that don't, know nothing about guns. Also, 99.9% of people that are anti-gun, have never been around one, much less shot one, and even less been trained on one.

Again, baseless conjecture and outright lies. You can be fully trained on guns and still be for harsher gun control. Logically, you should actually be for stricter gun control if you are trained, given the number of people who shoot at their own balls and celebrate those people by pointing their own guns at their balls or the number of toddlers that shoot themselves with their parent's loaded and insecurely stored guns. But what would I know, I just some dude who went through mandatory military service in my country and was fully trained on firearms...

 

7 hours ago, JZStudios said:

And yes, I 100% would come down on him for using a real bottle. You clearly didn't watch the video I posted. These prop makers take exceptional care with their equipment to make sure no one gets hurt. The prop guy isn't handing him a real bottle and telling him it's fake. He also shouldn't pick up random things and assume they're fake. That's toddler behavior.

No, I didn't watch it because it's irrelevant. Again, Baldwin was reportedly told that the gun was safe. Somewhere there must have been a breakdown in communication. But to then blame the actor for acting a certain way given the information he allegedly had is not grounds enough to blame him for the incident. According to the reports, he didn't randomly pick up a gun and started aiming at the crew. Again, you're making up large swaths of this out of whole cloth in order to criticize Baldwin for his political stance masked under all these nonsensical assumptions and pretenses. This intent is more transparent than you think, exactly because of stuff like this:

 

7 hours ago, JZStudios said:

It's pretty ironic though, you gotta admit. He was pretty consistent about giving people shit for shootings, thus we need gun regulation, so I hope you don't defend that behavior.

Now we're getting to the meat of things, all these conjectures lead to this, blaming him for the shooting by contrasting it with his political stance. I'm not going to mince words on this here, I think it's fucking disgusting to gloat over someone who now has to live to the end of his days with the fact that he has taken another human's life. How completely devoid of empathy can you be to make trite commentary about something like this just because you know that any time Baldwin now gets on his soapbox about gun control, this incident will be brought back up again and used to discredit him? Never mind how this completely ignores the victims and their relatives as well. This seems like you're happy it happened to Baldwin in particular just because of his thoughts on gun control. I hope you're ashamed of yourself.

[whm1974]

Sorry for my late reply to my own Thread. But even with low powered BB and Pellet Guns, the Rules of Gun Safety should be followed. Those can still cause injuries and even Death if misused.

 

Someone shot me with a BB Gun where I used to live. It went through my belt and left a welt on my skin with a bit of blood. I did called the police, and it never happen again.

[Sauron]

On 10/24/2021 at 3:10 AM, whm1974 said:

But I was under the impression that Prop Guns were not able to chambered Firearm Ammunition at all?

They're usually real guns loaded with blanks, however different countries have different safety regulations.

 

For instance, here in Italy the gun is rendered harmless via the insertion of a metal blocker in the chamber so it simply cannot fire a live round - at worst, with a live round it might explode in your hand but never shoot. It's illegal to even have live rounds near a movie set. Apparently, the crew were using the gun with live ammo for fun during breaks, which appears to be why the gun was loaded with live rounds when Baldwin fired it; this would have been illegal in Italy.

11 hours ago, LWM723 said:

Why did he shoot at a set employee? Obviously, they weren't filming at the time or he would have been shooting at an actor.

It was a scene where Baldwin was supposed to "shoot" towards the camera. They were not filming though, it was a rehearsal.

13 hours ago, JZStudios said:

Rule #1 of ANY firearm. It's ALWAYS loaded and it WILL kill anything you point it at.

It's literally a movie prop that got handed to an actor by (supposedly) a professional whose job it is to check that it's safe. You just couldn't shoot a scene like that if you assumed the gun was ready to fire a live round every time. Obviously double checking is never a bad idea but there was no reason for Baldwin to assume the weapon was lethal. The whole situation could have been avoided with better safety regulations, specifically by disallowing live ammunition on set. It's not really an argument for broader gun regulations on its own, but it definitely is an argument for stricter gun safety regulations on movie sets.

13 hours ago, JZStudios said:

The prop guy isn't handing him a real bottle and telling him it's fake.

In this case he literally got the weapon handed to him by a professional who shouted "cold gun" while giving it to him.

[JZStudios]

19 minutes ago, Sauron said:

They're usually real guns loaded with blanks, however different countries have different safety regulations.

 

For instance, here in Italy the gun is rendered harmless via the insertion of a metal blocker in the chamber so it simply cannot fire a live round - at worst, with a live round it might explode in your hand but never shoot. It's illegal to even have live rounds near a movie set. Apparently, the crew were using the gun with live ammo for fun during breaks, which appears to be why the gun was loaded with live rounds when Baldwin fired it; this would have been illegal in Italy.

It was a scene where Baldwin was supposed to "shoot" towards the camera. They were not filming though, it was a rehearsal.

It's literally a movie prop that got handed to an actor by (supposedly) a professional whose job it is to check that it's safe. You just couldn't shoot a scene like that if you assumed the gun was ready to fire a live round every time. Obviously double checking is never a bad idea but there was no reason for Baldwin to assume the weapon was lethal. The whole situation could have been avoided with better safety regulations, specifically by disallowing live ammunition on set. It's not really an argument for broader gun regulations on its own, but it definitely is an argument for stricter gun safety regulations on movie sets.

In this case he literally got the weapon handed to him by a professional who shouted "cold gun" while giving it to him.

For the love of FUCK! Did no one watch the video I posted? It's literally a 25 minute interview with the prop maker about how they make these guns inoperable with live ammo and how they go about safety measures on set.

 

Stop replying to me with points that aren't true.

[Avocado Diaboli]

1 hour ago, JZStudios said:

For the love of FUCK! Did no one watch the video I posted? It's literally a 25 minute interview with the prop maker about how they make these guns inoperable with live ammo and how they go about safety measures on set.

And yet, for some reason, this film shoot had a real operable weapon capable of firing real live ammo. So what is it now? Are guns always made inoperable on a film set or aren't they? And if they are, why should an actor obey rule #1 of gun safety? See how you contradict yourself here? You can't say Baldwin acted irresponsibly and also maintain that guns on film sets are always made inoperable by prop makers. Unless of course you have some kind of ulterior motive.

[Quackers101]

just don't like the safety standard in some movie making, in locations that doesn't value safety.

were accidents that might not be reported or stunts that should not be allowed and so on.

real deaths and "accidents" that should never be.

 

Also with the abuse at work, safety rules and living wages etc, being different. things are going to go wrong.

Like some talked about, knowing about guns can help but not always, how many that wanted to leave the rushed job for this movie, where they hired new people?

Many shortcuts and dangerous pitfalls.

[Sauron]

14 hours ago, JZStudios said:

For the love of FUCK! Did no one watch the video I posted? It's literally a 25 minute interview with the prop maker about how they make these guns inoperable with live ammo and how they go about safety measures on set.

I don't care, the gun in use was obviously perfectly capable of firing live ammunition. Not only that, a similar accident had already happened on the same set:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/alec-baldwin-seen-consoling-family-slain-cinematographer-set-problems-mount-2021-10-24/

Quote

According to the Los Angeles Times, more than a week ago Baldwin's stunt double accidentally fired two rounds from a prop firearm after being told it was "cold", an industry term meaning a weapon is not loaded with ammunition, including blanks.

Also, which is it? Should you always assume the gun is ready to kill, as you professed earlier, or is it literally impossible for it to fire live ammo despite having clearly and fatally fired live ammo?

14 hours ago, JZStudios said:

Stop replying to me with points that aren't true.

Funny coming from the person denying all available evidence with a random video they found on youtube.

On 10/25/2021 at 6:28 AM, trag1c said:

I almost wonder if it was a POV like shot where he was shooting at the camera and the lady was behind the camera.

It was.

[whm1974]

3 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

Props are never going to be 100 percent safe, and that's why stunt people usually do things in place of the actual actors.  Actual actors sometimes sign a waiver if they plan to put themselves in danger.  In this case, they told Baldwin the gun was cold, which meant that it was safe to fire.  They were wrong, and basically the accident happened from there.  Plastic can still cause accidents, like fatal shrapnel, to occur.

I wonder if Wax Bullets would be far safer to use on Sets? Not completely safe mind you, but prevent anything Fatal from occurring.

 

On another note: There is a T-shirt about this that comes across as Tasteless to me. There shouldn't be any actual ammo on the Set in the first place. That is all I'm going to say about that, to avoid bringing Politics into this.

[Video Beagle]

16 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

There shouldn't be any actual ammo on the Set in the first place.

While true, as has been referred to upthread, in the case of Jon-Eric Hexxum (self inflicted) and Brandon Lee (shot on the set of the Crow), even blanks can kill.

[whm1974]

58 minutes ago, Video Beagle said:

While true, as has been referred to upthread, in the case of Jon-Eric Hexxum (self inflicted) and Brandon Lee (shot on the set of the Crow), even blanks can kill.

I'm well aware that Blanks can kill. but wasn't the Actor far enough away that Blanks wouldn't do anything? Granted the "Prop" had some sort of Projectile loaded into it. I'm going to have to reread the Articles for the details.

[IPD]

My take is that even if the Armorer is 100% an idiot and it's a real gun and real ammo--that doesn't excuse culpability for proper handling of firearms.

 

I don't are if you hate guns and never want to own them.  If you are going to be handling them for cinema or theatre--you should be educated on gun safety.  And as far as I'm concerned, there is no such thing as a safe gun unless you check it yourself, or you are visually observing someone else clear it.

 

Hollywood seems to treat firearms like an afterthought that's solely the responsibility of the armorer.  That grinds my gears.  The persons using the firearms should at all times know what functionality the weapon they are holding has--and what type of rounds are loaded into it (dummy, live, blanks, rubber, etc).  And that doesn't mean asking someone else to tell you; it means checking the weapon yourself.

 

---

 

In the aviation community, there's  something called Crew Resource Management (CRM).  CRM teaches that everyone is a sensor; anyone can speak up; anyone can stop a chain of catastrophe from happening.  There's no rank in the cockpit--just individually trained people who may all notice different things and need to communicate about aberrations and anomalies.  CRM came about because the Pilot in Charge (PIC) had often been myopic and missed critical/vital information that was known or observed by an Engineer or CoPilot, but was either not relayed or ignored by the PIC--which led to myriad crashes/mishaps.

 

The same should work on movie sets.  But if the armorer is the only one who knows a darn thing about firearms--you have only 1 person who can catch potential errors--and that's when bad things happen.

 

P.S.

Remember in "It's a Wonderful Life" when George Bailey stops Mr. Gower (the druggist) from poisoning a kid because of filling a prescription wrong?  Yeah....

[whm1974]

1 hour ago, IPD said:

My take is that even if the Armorer is 100% an idiot and it's a real gun and real ammo--that doesn't excuse culpability for proper handling of firearms.

 

I don't are if you hate guns and never want to own them.  If you are going to be handling them for cinema or theatre--you should be educated on gun safety.  And as far as I'm concerned, there is no such thing as a safe gun unless you check it yourself, or you are visually observing someone else clear it.

 

Hollywood seems to treat firearms like an afterthought that's solely the responsibility of the armorer.  That grinds my gears.  The persons using the firearms should at all times know what functionality the weapon they are holding has--and what type of rounds are loaded into it (dummy, live, blanks, rubber, etc).  And that doesn't mean asking someone else to tell you; it means checking the weapon yourself.

 

---

 

In the aviation community, there's  something called Crew Resource Management (CRM).  CRM teaches that everyone is a sensor; anyone can speak up; anyone can stop a chain of catastrophe from happening.  There's no rank in the cockpit--just individually trained people who may all notice different things and need to communicate about aberrations and anomalies.  CRM came about because the Pilot in Charge (PIC) had often been myopic and missed critical/vital information that was known or observed by an Engineer or CoPilot, but was either not relayed or ignored by the PIC--which led to myriad crashes/mishaps.

 

The same should work on movie sets.  But if the armorer is the only one who knows a darn thing about firearms--you have only 1 person who can catch potential errors--and that's when bad things happen.

 

P.S.

Remember in "It's a Wonderful Life" when George Bailey stops Mr. Gower (the druggist) from poisoning a kid because of filling a prescription wrong?  Yeah....

I haven't seen that since I was a kid in the single digits... Well maybe random clips on TV...

[Shreyas1]

Honestly at this point they should just teach gun safety at schools. Maybe pair it with sex Ed or something. If you live in the US chances are you will interact with a firearm in your lifetime, regardless of whether you want to own one or not

[whm1974]

1 hour ago, Shreyas1 said:

Honestly at this point they should just teach gun safety at schools. Maybe pair it with sex Ed or something. If you live in the US chances are you will interact with a firearm in your lifetime, regardless of whether you want to own one or not

Didn't the NRA have Eddie Eagle childern book explain to small childern "don't touch, tell an Adult" or something?

 

A lot of folks made a big fuss over it way back then for some reason.

[sub68]

On 10/24/2021 at 1:24 AM, whm1974 said:

What about blank firing guns?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzPGUn8P5MQ

[sub68]

On 10/23/2021 at 10:33 PM, LWM723 said:

Apparently they use real guns in the states, go figure.

I think it comes down to what is provided on set.

I have no idea why live guns were on set.

On 10/23/2021 at 9:10 PM, whm1974 said:

but back when I did... I always checked if if I pick one up or had one handed to me.

I always do that even to airsoft.

Also apparently other people didn't like how things were handled on set.

To simplify that video:

Live rounds weren't supposed to be on set.

They thought the gun was safe ( ie there was no rounds)

Multiple people said the set was unsafe so yeah.

The person in charge of the guns was uncomfeterble about something before the filming.

There were somany red flags.

[whm1974]

24 minutes ago, sub68 said:

I think it comes down to what is provided on set.

I have no idea why live guns were on set.

I always do that even to airsoft.

Also apparently other people didn't like how things were handled on set.

To simplify that video:

Live rounds weren't supposed to be on set.

They thought the gun was safe ( ie there was no rounds)

Multiple people said the set was unsafe so yeah.

The person in charge of the guns was uncomfeterble about something before the filming.

There were somany red flags.

This is a well known Actor. I would think that at his age, he would insist for his own damn Safety, that the Set he is working at, be a Safe One... 

 

[sub68]

2 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

I would think that at his age, he would insist for his own damn Safety,

Isnt he ainti gun?

If so he wouldn't know safety other than every gun is not safe

4 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

that the Set he is working at, be a Safe One... 

He assumed the gun was safe.

I think he didnt check it properly

5 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

This is a well known Actor.

potato potato it doesn't matter.

He didnt check.

if this video was shared to everyone (during safety briefs) I think that accident wouldn't have happend.

 

[whm1974]

1 hour ago, sub68 said:

Isnt he ainti gun?

If so he wouldn't know safety other than every gun is not safe

He assumed the gun was safe.

I think he didnt check it properly

potato potato it doesn't matter.

He didnt check.

if this video was shared to everyone (during safety briefs) I think that accident wouldn't have happend.

 

My Point was that Safety is Everybody's Responsibility.

 

 

[sub68]

Just now, whm1974 said:

My Point was that Safety is Everybody's Responsibility.

 

 

Ok I am sorry for rambling.

I just sometimes not really pay attention 

[whm1974]

14 minutes ago, sub68 said:

Ok I am sorry for rambling.

I just sometimes not really pay attention 

Same here.

[sub68]

8 minutes ago, whm1974 said:

Same here.

Yeah sometimes we just don’t think straight so welcome to the club 

[Quackers101]

ouch, seems like the crew on set used LIVE AMMUNITION before this happened with various guns like from the set.

to I guess a game about shooting bottles in their free time.

 

why it was not fixed or checked more or cleared it? hope there was nothing malicious behind it like due to the work conditions or if the conditions just made it easier for such a "mistake" to happen.

[whm1974]

19 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

ouch, seems like the crew on set used LIVE AMMUNITION before this happened with various guns like from the set.

to I guess a game about shooting bottles in their free time.

 

why it was not fixed or checked more or cleared it? hope there was nothing malicious behind it like due to the work conditions or if the conditions just made it easier for such a "mistake" to happen.

Couldn't they have used a Pellet Gun or .22 Rimfire Firearm? Better yet, put up the left over Boxes of ammo with the real guns in the Crew's Trailers and locked up.

[LWM723]

Regardless, somebody put that bullet in the gun and should be charged. Maybe there's a fingerprint on the shell.