Morrissey said if new testing of the gun showed it was working, she would recharge Baldwin.

  • meco03211@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If that was literally their job that they are being paid to do and you were specifically using the gun to film a movie involving you pointing that gun at someone and pulling the trigger under the pretense it was cleared and verified by a professional prior to the filming, they should definitely shoulder some burden.

    Arguments can be made about working conditions not being suitable causing mistakes to be made and those conditions were brought on by Baldwin, but then he should be treated almost as two separate people. If it had been a different actor to pull the trigger, would that actor be liable? Would the producer, or whatever role Baldwin had outside of acting, be liable?

    • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it was a different actors then yes, they should still be held accountable in some way. Anyone who has ever taken even a basic gun safty course knows the first thing you do when you are given a gun is to check the chamber to see if it is loaded every single time.

      Every time I go so a shooting range with friends and it is their turn to shoot I place my handgun on the bench unloaded with the chamber/Cylinder open and the mag/rounds next to it. Complacency kills and this movie is a perfect example of extreme negligence from the top down.

      • stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        False equivalency. Those are completely different situations. This gun was MEANT to be loaded and chambered because THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO FIRE IT IN FRONT OF A CAMERA. But go on with your “oh I’m so good because I know gun safety and am the expert of the experts now reee”.