this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
150 points (100.0% liked)

movies

3167 readers
229 users here now

Matrix room: https://matrix.to/#/#fediversefilms:matrix.org

Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.

🔎 Find discussion threads

A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome

Related communities:

Show communities:

Discussion communities:

RULES

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.

2024 discussion threads

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Well they did a good job convincing the public that the person holding the gun isn't responsible for what happens with said gun, considering the down votes. Happened last time I said he needs to be punished for what he did.

Gun safety is only important if you're not rich/famous/ an actor

[–] [email protected] 43 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Yeah, keanu reeves is a dick for pointing guns at everyone in John Wick. He should practice gun safety and always point the barrel down whenever he's doing a scene. /s

Its sort of absurd to expect baldwin to not trust his weapon specialist, aside from the fact that fucking with blanks after a "professional" has loaded the weapon can and will result in death regardless of what happened in this situation.

Just tell us you hate guns and are ignorant of on-set heirarchy.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Alec wasn't filming at the time. Keanu went through actual training to handle firearms on screen which I think should be the minimum. The fact that Keanu made 4 movies in that series without killing anyone proves it can be done safely. In the circumstances of filming I would be unreasonable to expect every one of the 4 rules to be followed at all times, but breaking every single one of those rules all at once should not happen. The bare minimum that Alec can and should've done is inspect the gun to see if it's loaded, and that it's loaded with "safe" rounds. I mean that's the first thing I do!

Also I own several guns, try not to make assumptions.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago

You can own several guns. But have you worked on any films?

There is a long list of things that should not have happened on that set. But I don't think Alec should have been charged. His role of producer has little to do with that too, unless he was specifically involved in the hiring and firing of employees. It's not like he was the sole producer. Those responsibilities weren't his.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

The bare minimum that Alec can and should've done is inspect the gun to see if it's loaded, and that it's loaded with "safe" rounds. I mean that's the first thing I do!

It really isn't, though.

Insurance doesn't allow actors to adjust weaponry on set.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Cool thing is that he wasn't just an actor on set, he was a producer as well. Which entails more responsibility.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago

Considering she was head armorer and assistant armorer in other movies, im not sure why he would think she wasnt a qualified individual.

Its not like he hired a random person on the street.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So Insurance contract supercedes gun safety handling?

🤡

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

On a movie set, yes.

The people who are licensed and insured to ensure gun safety are the ones responsible for it.

Im not sure why you're hellbent on making it seem like all of the rules for gun safety on set werent followed.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I am telling you that a person handling a gun is responsible for that gun, this is gun ownership 101 and it doesn't get overridden but by contract law or set hierarchy.

The only reason this argument worked here is because prosecutor decided so, full stop

People can make up their own minds why tje prosecutor do this for a rich "influencer" lol

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Quick hypothetical.

If every actor on set messed with the blanks they were given do you think there would be more gun related deaths on the set of a movie, or less?

Keep in mind there have only been two deaths since 1993, brandon lee and this incident.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

We are discussing legal liability both personally and head guy on set.

Alec fucked on both levels.

What facts you are trying to inject here are second or third order operation tonthe discussion of alecs Liability

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

There should be some sort of trial, with a judge, prosecutors, and defense for this so we can get to the bottom of it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

It was announced by an AD.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

What is the first rule of handling a weapon dear?

Which rules are more important set "hierarchy" or gun safety?

Asking for a friend dear

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What are you even talking about? You seriously think people in movies shouldn't be pointing guns at each other for a scene? How many westerns have been made with no problems whatsoever? This was the fault of an incompotent armoror on set.

"Sorry director, I can't point a gun at someone for this scene cuz gun safety is more important." Lol.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Nobody said that... You made that up.

But if you play with guns, it is your responsibility not to kill anyone

This is gun safety 101.

Any adult person knows this, anyone who doesn't has no business touching a weapon.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Gun safety 101 is you never, under any circumstances, point your gun at something you don’t intend to kill. So yes, you are absolutely saying that actors shouldn’t be pointing guns at other actors.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is this supposed to be a flex?

If this rule was followed the vicitm would alive...

Or they could like check the weapon before playing with it... Second best option if you really going to be playing with weapons

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

How could that possibly be a flex? If this rule was followed movies wouldn’t have guns. If this is what you are arguing then that’s fine. But if guns are in movies, they will be pointed at other humans.

Also, people in this same thread have told you why untrained actors should NOT be fiddling with guns. You’d rather be ignorant and ignore everyone for some strange reason.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

untrained actors should NOT be fiddling with guns.

Untrained people should not be touching guns, period. This common sense 101

people in this same thread have told you

And I told them that person handling a weapon is responsible for the weapon, being an actor doesn't remove this liability unless you are rich it seems

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So just say you don’t think guns should be in movies. That’s a valid argument. What you are trying to say is stupid.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't think amateurs should be killing people on set.

I made my position clear.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Nobody thinks that. You are deliberately being ignorant.

You only have a hard on for punishing Baldwin because you hate guns and rich people.

Movie stunts are FAR more unsafe than gun use in movies, yet I have a feeling you aren’t advocating to rid stunts from movies.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't think that rich man have the right to mishandle fire arms and walk away from basic gun safety duties. This being dropped on Christmas eve is a classic PR stunt, and prosecutor is in on it.

You clearly disagree, there is enough air for both on planet earth. That's what is called an impasse and that is totally ok;)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

That’s not what happened but ok lol let’s call it an impasse.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

You said that my man. Where on earth did you learn that gun safety 101 is "don't kill anyone"? Lol.

Gun safety 101 is don't point one at something unless you intend to shoot it.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The rules that have been put into place after the death of brandon lee which have resulted in the deaths of only 2 people since 1993.

Those rules.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Do these rules supercede the law?

Who hired the armor and how is the head guy on the set?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Let's say i hired someone to build a house for me.

The house ostensibly looks fine and seems sturdy.

I invite my friends over, and they come inside the house.

I walk outside to move some trash and shut the door.

Shutting the door causes the house to collapse, killing everyone inside.

Am i responsible for my friends deaths? I did kill them by knocking down my house after all.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Guns are subject to special handling rules because their intent is to kill people.

Analogies here are red herring

Guns are made to kill people and anyone whp handles huns is held to the highest standard of care on the personal level. This is not something you can contract away unless you are a regime whore of certain level like Alex

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ah got it, this is just your personal venedetta against alec baldwin.

Weird.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Wrong... This is about systemic injustice this case exposes.

But nice try dear;)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Which systemic injustice is that?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Rich people getting away with killing the poors.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

How exactly did he "get away" with it. What legal trickery did he use?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Now do mob bosses and realize how flawed your logic is.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Responsibilityto handle guns safely is not something that can waived with an employment arrangement.

But Hollywood LARPers love their regime whores too much to give a fuck. I bet these are the same clowsn are who want "gun control"

Pathetic Caricatures of a citizen

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No major gun incidents for decades in the film industry! Since Brendon lee. Alec made the first major fuckup since then and killed someone with a live round and Noone sees anything wrong with that.

I'm not saying other people didn't fuck up and deserve punishment aka the armorer, but Alec also deserves to answer for it

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Alec also deserves to answer for it

Exactly, but corruption within justice system prevented any accountability.

Another microcosm of how US regime operates.

Two tier justice system and plebs like it as is 🤡