Originally Posted by splatbass:
So an actor can only play roles of people who agree with them? That would mean no one could play a murderer or any other character that they personally find repulsive. Ridiculously illogical.
I'm not anti-gun by the way before you predictably say I am.
Yeah, you're not anti-gun like I'm not anti-Denver. :-)
And what you posted has exactly dick to do with what I said. My point is that anybody who makes millions of dollars acting in films that glorify gun use and gun violence but at the same time is opposed to the people who pay to watch those films being able to own guns is a fucking hypocrite piece of shit. Period.
And anybody who has armed bodyguards (like the Moms Demand Action cunt) but wants to restrict the rights of others to own guns is a fucking hypocrite piece of shit. Period.
Is that clear enough, or should I use smaller words?
And if somebody like James Woods had accidentally killed somebody on a movie set, the first person calling for his head would have been Alec Baldwin. He might have even done a skit about it on Saturday Night Live. [Reply]
If it turns out there was an actual round used, I’d be curious how that could be completely accidental and not some level of foul play here. I guess it’s possible it’s completely negligence on the part of the prop person but even having actual ammunition around seems unnecessary. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
I think you're oversimplifying this quite a bit and making a lot of assumptions based on your dislike of the guy. He's one of six producers among five production companies. While it's remotely possible that he has some responsibility for decisions related to the crew, it's a pretty big leap to assume that he personally made the decision that they didn't need a union armorer on set. And even if he did, unless they knowingly hired someone who wasn't qualified, it still comes down to whoever's job it was to make sure the guns on set were safe.
Well, obviously they're all liable. But the thread is pretty much about Baldwin. And the facts have clearly shown that whoever was in charge of the weapons wasn't qualified. Does he also deserve blame? Of course. He should have told them he wasn't qualified and walked away. [Reply]
This is an interesting video interviewing a firearms experts who has been asked by the police to investigate the shooting. He said a gun classified as a "prop gun" has been modified so it can't load cartridges with bullets, only blanks. so the question he has is if the gun was a legitimate prop gun or if they were using a gun that wasn't modified.
In reading the LA Times article it does sound like the crews were being treated somewhat poorly and going through unnecessary challenges and thus voicing their concerns. I wonder how much input Baldwin had on that and the decision to tell them to leave when they started getting too noisy.
Also it says the prop had misfired the week before. I’m guessing that information didn’t get passed to the new crew so who knows what sort of situation they walked into. [Reply]
Alec Baldwin always seems like he's miserable and grouchy.
Like the person everyone knows that could go off on a rage at the drop of a hat. You could ask him when was the last time you were happy and he might say when I was yelling at my waiter yesterday, something like that. [Reply]
