Tell the several very young kids in the USA who shoot their dad every year it wasn't an accident...
There's no such thing as gun safety. The only purpose a gun has, is to kill.
Alec Baldwin
- Thread starter pucho812
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
Tell the several very young kids in the USA who shoot their dad every year it wasn't an accident...
There's no such thing as gun safety. The only purpose a gun has, is to kill.
Are you talking about kids in Chicago using their own guns to shoot dads, or some kid using a parent's unsecured gun. Not securing a lethal weapon when kids are around is not an accident it is gross negligence.
Don't tell all the olympic target shooters.
I have several weapons around the house but only my BB gun is technically a "gun" (smooth bore).
My GAMO 0.177 has a rifled barrel (so is a rifle) and has successfully killed multiple squirrels over the years who tried to poach my pecans. Indeed killing is it's purpose.
My 9MM handgun has a short rifled barrel. Personal self-defense is it's raison d'être. I have no immediate plans to kill anybody with it, and I am reluctant to even talk about it.
JR
grid_stopper
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2016
- Messages
- 205
trying to make this a gun control issue seems a bit stupid to me. Fatal accidents happen on film sets far more often than they should(very few of those accidents are gun related, btw), and almost always are the result of corners being cut, + people on set having to walk a fine line between keeping people safe, and not kicking up too much of a stink so they can continue to work in the film industry. Until people can raise these issues without fear of blowback, these tragedies will continue to happen. framing this as a gun control issue does absolutely nothing to help things.
Last edited:
It literally is a gun safety issue, while budget corner cutting and a sloppy undisciplined set contributed to the sitch.
As I already shared one director got prison time for a negligent film set death (by train). Unclear what will happen with this celebrity shooter but police are not calling this an accident.
Cutting safety corners happens in all industries, and is always wrong.
JR
grid_stopper
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2016
- Messages
- 205
I do not disagree with this, i was mostly referring to cyranos posts. Yes, gun safety is a big part of this, but it falls under a larger umbrella problem of on set saftey. Even in the last few years too many people have died on set for non gun related reasons that were all entirely preventable.
Lemme see...
A simple solution (no real guns on set) won't do because there are other problems?
Yeah, right. I see NRA propaganda must have infested your brains. Maybe we should start using real dynamite or TNT on filmsets too.
I'm talking about a real situation that's easy to call gross negligence in hindsight:
Dad takes out his gun from the gun safe. Puts it down. Phone rings. Dad picks up the phone. Meanwhile, the toddler entered the room, sees the gun and picks it up. Pulls the trigger, cause the toddler takes it for a toy. Two lives destroyed.
There shouldn't be a bullet in the chamber. But we're all human. Of course, NRA members are super human.
At least, the rest of the world sees the problem. Well, maybe not Russians...
500 rounds found on the set. Some people had the guts to complain about this weeks before. No action taken. Why? Because some people simply are afraid of complaining in the pro-gun atmosphere. After all, the complainers usually don't own a gun. The other side does and they have shown repeatedly they like to use it.
I'm pretty sure you are a responsible user, John. But I'm also pretty sure a lot of others aren't. Yet, they can go to a supermarket and buy an assault gun without too much hassle. At least in many states.
If you can't see the problem, you're obviously blind...
EDIT: sorry, an assault rifle, of course.
A simple solution (no real guns on set) won't do because there are other problems?
Yeah, right. I see NRA propaganda must have infested your brains. Maybe we should start using real dynamite or TNT on filmsets too.
I'm talking about a real situation that's easy to call gross negligence in hindsight:
Dad takes out his gun from the gun safe. Puts it down. Phone rings. Dad picks up the phone. Meanwhile, the toddler entered the room, sees the gun and picks it up. Pulls the trigger, cause the toddler takes it for a toy. Two lives destroyed.
There shouldn't be a bullet in the chamber. But we're all human. Of course, NRA members are super human.
At least, the rest of the world sees the problem. Well, maybe not Russians...
500 rounds found on the set. Some people had the guts to complain about this weeks before. No action taken. Why? Because some people simply are afraid of complaining in the pro-gun atmosphere. After all, the complainers usually don't own a gun. The other side does and they have shown repeatedly they like to use it.
I'm pretty sure you are a responsible user, John. But I'm also pretty sure a lot of others aren't. Yet, they can go to a supermarket and buy an assault gun without too much hassle. At least in many states.
If you can't see the problem, you're obviously blind...
EDIT: sorry, an assault rifle, of course.
If I follow your argument you are saying the solution is to get rid of all guns. By that same logic we could likewise prevent all future auto collisions by getting rid of all cars.
This movie set death is headline news because the celebrity shooter is an elite and high profile anti-gun activist. He doesn't trust normal citizens to own firearms, while demonstrating that he should not be trusted to handle weapons, while it was somebody else's (the armorer's) primary function to keep loaded weapons out of actor's hands and off that set.
===
IMO wrt your hypothetical... the dad is a dumbass for leaving his loaded weapon unattended even briefly.
====
If we want to address some low hanging fruit for reducing gun deaths I am concerned about all the street crime gun violence in many US cities.
Reducing police presence seems to be the exact opposite approach to improve this situation and the trending statistics reflect that. I am not very optimistic about Chicago improving any time soon but I am watching NYC optimistically because both mayoral candidates are strong police supporters. Maybe they can reverse the current trajectory.
If we are going to take away people's firearms lets take them from the criminals first.
JR
This movie set death is headline news because the celebrity shooter is an elite and high profile anti-gun activist. He doesn't trust normal citizens to own firearms, while demonstrating that he should not be trusted to handle weapons, while it was somebody else's (the armorer's) primary function to keep loaded weapons out of actor's hands and off that set.
===
IMO wrt your hypothetical... the dad is a dumbass for leaving his loaded weapon unattended even briefly.
====
If we want to address some low hanging fruit for reducing gun deaths I am concerned about all the street crime gun violence in many US cities.
Reducing police presence seems to be the exact opposite approach to improve this situation and the trending statistics reflect that. I am not very optimistic about Chicago improving any time soon but I am watching NYC optimistically because both mayoral candidates are strong police supporters. Maybe they can reverse the current trajectory.
If we are going to take away people's firearms lets take them from the criminals first.
JR
pucho812
Well-known member
Yes 500 rounds on set, no action was taken. Considering the producer is very anti firearm you would think they would have just jumped right on it but nope they didn’t. They have a budget to adhere to, a schedule they have to adhere to and a myriad of other issues that often cause them to look the other way until it is too late. I think you will find here that the main factor was negligence. Just like in your question about the dad putting the gun down and the baby picking it up, negligence.
as a person who has a ccw, grew up in a family who went hunting, and a person who has been around firearms my entire life, I can tell you how often negligence plays a part in firearm accidents. In ccw class they cover how a person should be able to tell their firearm is loaded by sight, sound, and feel. this is because most situations where a person would want or need a firearm you don’t always have the ability to just look and see if you are loading or unloading your firearm. It’s hard to or time consuming to confirm and double confirm the status of firearm
ruffrecords
Well-known member
Your logic is flawed. It is people not guns that kill. It is also people not cars that kill. The solution in both cases is to stop people using guns and stop them driving cars as well.
Cheers
Ian
grid_stopper
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2016
- Messages
- 205
This is such a bizarre and overly simplistic misunderstanding of how things actually work on a film set. If you would take the time to actually comprehend what im saying, and not just gloss over it before angrily responding you would likely see the point im getting at. That point being, until direct and meaningful action is taken to change the culture on film sets, you can ban whatever the hell you want, and it wont make a lick of difference. Anecdotally, I can tell you of at least 3 people who have died on set in the last 3-4 years, and thats just in my city(which isnt all that big, by the way), and what I can recall off the top of my head. None of those involved guns and all of them were entirely preventable. treating a symptom, and not the root cause is never a way to successfully do anything, ever.
I agree this is more of a workplace safety issue. I am in favor of strong gun control. Saying that is anti gun is a false equivalency. It seems when you get down to it the argument against gun liscencing is some kind of belief that you will be able to stop a tyrannical regime with a 9mm. Just ridiculous. There is also the more ridiculous good guy/ bad guy argument. Like most gun deaths don’t happen when some normal joe looses their shit and kills someone. I’ve never heard any elected official suggest taking anyone’s legally purchased private property despite hearing “Hillary wants to take your guns” over and over.
Last edited:
To change the culture on a film set I see two possibilities... extensive regulation and enforcement (unlikely) or sic the lawyers on them. It ultimately comes down to bottom line cost, make it cheaper to be safe. Of course this is easier said than done.
Most dangerous gigs are in construction, then agriculture, and transportation... of course there are unlimited ways to kill yourself or others.
JR
I never said that, John.
I just questioned the need to have real guns on a filmset. Please don't put words in my mouth.
Did Alec Baldwin know about it?
I don't know, do you? Maybe he should have, but having been on a few filmsets, I can see it's not easy to keep on top of everything that's happening.
Having been around hunters too, I know how negligent some are. Most are not, but you need just one to end up dead...
So you're saying Alec Baldwin had the intention to kill?
During his divorce, managing anger was mentioned. Possible. But we don't know, do we?
And while we're assuming, could it be this was a conspiracy to get rid of him?
pucho812
Well-known member
Set safety concerns were brought up previously, it would be nearly impossible for him to not know about it.
Yeah, I hate it when that happens (to me all the time )... so are you saying to ban real guns from film sets?
The primary job of the armorer is to make sure there are no "loaded" guns on a film set, that should be enough. It is also possible to disable weapons so they can't fire, but these seem to be extraordinary measures to compensate for professionals not doing their jobs.
JR
I totally agree with this. I always take notice of the gun handling procedure in gun scenes. 90% of the time I see errors.
boji
Well-known member
Live fire for foley and ground effects still beats CGI in some cases. Same with rotoscoping for some things. Imagine nowadays with CGI they can do a lot without actors present, as a layer in post.
So you admit it doesn't work in practice?
