Site seems to be OK. Load issue should be resolved now.

Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Sit back and talk with friends. Same rules as before. Rule #1-Relax with friends on the front or back porch.
Rule #2-No Politics, religion or anything above a G level.
User avatar
markiver54
Deputy Marshal
Posts: 11130
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:49 am
Location: Biue Ridge Mountains, NC
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by markiver54 » Tue Oct 26, 2021 5:31 pm

RanchRoper wrote:
Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:55 pm
Anyone handling a firearm has a responsibility to prove it safe. The buck stops with Baldwin.
AMEN!
Nuf said IMO. Let's leave this be, and hopefully we'll see.
I'm your Huckleberry

User avatar
brm4450
Drover
Posts: 3539
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2020 3:48 pm
Location: Rural Dacotah Territory
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by brm4450 » Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:39 pm

Moving on
"when you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk"
Igitur quī dēsīderat pācem, præparet bellum

Travlin
Cowboy
Posts: 1533
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 1:06 am

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by Travlin » Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:39 pm

The man was ignorant about firearms. Any one of us been handed that handgun we would have checked it ourselves and not taken any other persons word.

Coach
Cowboy
Posts: 1468
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 12:39 am
Location: California
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by Coach » Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:50 am

Let’s go Alec…
Deplorable California 2A supporter.

220
Cowboy
Posts: 1028
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 11:11 pm
Australia

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by 220 » Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:05 am

Travlin wrote:
Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:39 pm
The man was ignorant about firearms. Any one of us been handed that handgun we would have checked it ourselves and not taken any other persons word.
Not checking it wasnt as much an issue as drawing it, cocking it, aiming it and then pulling the trigger.
My understanding is it wasnt even a take just a bit of a rehearsal so why the need to cock let alone fire it.

All this talk about hot and cold guns has me wondering is a gun loaded with blanks classed as hot or cold?

User avatar
GunnyGene
Drover
Posts: 3005
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:15 am
Location: Monroe County, MS
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by GunnyGene » Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:23 am

220 wrote:
Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:05 am
Travlin wrote:
Tue Oct 26, 2021 9:39 pm
The man was ignorant about firearms. Any one of us been handed that handgun we would have checked it ourselves and not taken any other persons word.
Not checking it wasnt as much an issue as drawing it, cocking it, aiming it and then pulling the trigger.
My understanding is it wasnt even a take just a bit of a rehearsal so why the need to cock let alone fire it.

All this talk about hot and cold guns has me wondering is a gun loaded with blanks classed as hot or cold?
This should explain it. Should be noted that there are different types of "blanks" also. Some are crimped with nothing in them but powder, other's have a wad to hold the powder in the case, etc. Either can have different amounts of powder depending on how big a flash/bang the director wants. Similar to explosions, where a grenade goes off that looks like a nuke on film, or flips a 3000lb car over. And then there's "Dummy" rounds that look like the real deal but don't have any powder or live primer, used for shots where they are being loaded by the actor into a magazine or cylinder. See that a lot. And also there's CGI for scenes where a rubber gun is used and flash/bang/recoil/wound is 100% fake.

Anything that comes out of Hollywood (or others) should be assumed to be pure fantasy, but people want stuff that looks like reality. Reality comes from combat photographers, security and body cams, etc. Watch some of the Victory at Sea films on Youtube.
https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/se ... d=80780487

Zanoff said the first assistant director is the most important safety person on set. They are the ones to dictate when to bring the guns on set and whether the gun will be a "cold gun" or a "hot gun."

"A cold gun would be totally unloaded, nothing in it," said Zanoff. "A hot gun would be one loaded with a blank and ready to do gunfire. The guns should not get loaded until the first [assistant director] directs the armorer to load the specific gun."
Last edited by GunnyGene on Wed Oct 27, 2021 9:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes is rapidly becoming a reality (11/2023). Para Bellum.

Travlin
Cowboy
Posts: 1533
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 1:06 am

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by Travlin » Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:57 am

I don't know why they couldn't use something like a starter pistol that has a short chamber that will only take blanks and the barrel is plugged with a hole at the top to let the gas of the blank out. Or maybe one of the "fake guns" that we see advertised and dub in the sound later. How many times have we seen a police shoot out in a building and afterwards everyone is talking in a normal tone of voice. They would all be deaf for several hours.

User avatar
GunnyGene
Drover
Posts: 3005
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:15 am
Location: Monroe County, MS
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by GunnyGene » Wed Oct 27, 2021 9:04 am

Travlin wrote:
Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:57 am
I don't know why they couldn't use something like a starter pistol that has a short chamber that will only take blanks and the barrel is plugged with a hole at the top to let the gas of the blank out. Or maybe one of the "fake guns" that we see advertised and dub in the sound later. How many times have we seen a police shoot out in a building and afterwards everyone is talking in a normal tone of voice. They would all be deaf for several hours.
Colion Noir has some pointed comments about this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3vHhnQaryI
Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes is rapidly becoming a reality (11/2023). Para Bellum.

User avatar
GunnyGene
Drover
Posts: 3005
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:15 am
Location: Monroe County, MS
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by GunnyGene » Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:00 pm

More is coming to light from professional armorers:

Excerpt:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/522394-2/

Richard Collins owns more than 1,000 machine guns and 4,000 other firearms. He stores his massive collection in two safes. Each is 1,000 square feet – the doors weigh 5,000 pounds.

Collins is president of Movie Armaments Group. Founded 40 years ago, MAG supplies guns, tactical gear, uniforms, military equipment and lashings of expertise to the film industry. All of his armorers are veterans of elite police and/or military units.

Some of the films he’s worked on include: “Suicide Squad,” “Total Recall,” “Robocop,” and “xXx,” with Vin Diesel.

Collins’ team does much more than supply guns.

Collins reached out to the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project to set the record straight.

“Everything that was done there is against protocols,” Collins said. “There is no law that governs what armorers do on set, but there are safety protocols set by the film union.”

Anyone working with firearms on set is required to read the safety rules, Collins explained, and the producers and directors have to be aware of the rules.

“The number one rule is no live ammunition can come to the set – period,” he said. “The second rule is that firearms used for live fire are never brought to the set. We have firearms dedicated to blank fire.”

Ultimately, the armorer is responsible for safety when firearms are used, which on the “Rust” set was the responsibility of 24-year-old Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

“In this case the armorer was a young girl and she didn’t know how to put her foot down,” Collins said. “No one should touch guns but the armorer.”

Armorers are required to keep all firearms in their “custody and control” at all times. Crew members or others not working with the guns are not allowed to touch them. If the armorer needs to go to the bathroom or take a break, they’re supposed to contact another armorer to relieve them. In this case, Collins said, since it was a low-budget film, Reed was the only armorer on set, so she should have asked someone from the props department to look after the guns so no one handled them if she needed a break.

Alec Baldwin’s fatal shooting occurred during a “cold gun” scene involving a real firearm, which has its own safety protocols.

Reed should have cleared the revolver herself to ensure it was not loaded. Then, she should have cleared or “proofed” the weapon for the assistant director. Then, she should have proofed the weapon for the “talent,” in this case Baldwin. After acknowledging the gun was clear, only then should Baldwin have accepted the gun from her.

“None of that was done with Baldwin,” Collins said. “He’s been on gun movies before. He knows the procedures. You don’t accept the gun from the assistant director, which was done here. You accept the gun only from the armorer.”

Clearing a single-action revolver like the one Baldwin used is a tedious process.

“You open the gate. The gun is on half-cock. You check each chamber – you check seven chambers to make sure you didn’t miss one. Then, you bring back the hammer and drop the hammer seven times, and then you do the same for the actor before you hand it to them,” Collins said.

“The talent has got to see that. They’ve got to know you’re safe. Lots of talent are afraid of firearms. You have to hold their hand a bit and keep them safe. You have to overdo it. When an armorer does everything they’re supposed to, the gun’s empty. Everyone’s checked it. We all know it’s safe. There’s no problem. We can relax. Everyone’s always in a hurry on set. They’re always behind schedule. They will try to rush you. You can’t allow that.”

During the “Rust” production, the armorer, Reed, was reportedly not allowed on set because of COVID-19 regulations.

“That’s bullshit if that’s true,” Collins said. “She screwed up and didn’t hand the gun to the talent because she wasn’t allowed to be there. There’s a cardinal rule: The armorer is responsible to clear the gun, clear it again, go to the talent and clear it again. That rule is never broken.”
Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes is rapidly becoming a reality (11/2023). Para Bellum.

User avatar
BrokenolMarine
Ranch Foreman
Posts: 7478
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 8:28 am
Location: South Central Oklahoma in the mountains
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by BrokenolMarine » Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:21 pm

GunnyGene wrote:
Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:00 pm
More is coming to light from professional armorers:

Excerpt:
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/522394-2/

Richard Collins owns more than 1,000 machine guns and 4,000 other firearms. He stores his massive collection in two safes. Each is 1,000 square feet – the doors weigh 5,000 pounds.

Collins is president of Movie Armaments Group. Founded 40 years ago, MAG supplies guns, tactical gear, uniforms, military equipment and lashings of expertise to the film industry. All of his armorers are veterans of elite police and/or military units.

Some of the films he’s worked on include: “Suicide Squad,” “Total Recall,” “Robocop,” and “xXx,” with Vin Diesel.

Collins’ team does much more than supply guns.

Collins reached out to the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project to set the record straight.

“Everything that was done there is against protocols,” Collins said. “There is no law that governs what armorers do on set, but there are safety protocols set by the film union.”

Anyone working with firearms on set is required to read the safety rules, Collins explained, and the producers and directors have to be aware of the rules.

“The number one rule is no live ammunition can come to the set – period,” he said. “The second rule is that firearms used for live fire are never brought to the set. We have firearms dedicated to blank fire.”

Ultimately, the armorer is responsible for safety when firearms are used, which on the “Rust” set was the responsibility of 24-year-old Hannah Gutierrez Reed.

“In this case the armorer was a young girl and she didn’t know how to put her foot down,” Collins said. “No one should touch guns but the armorer.”

Armorers are required to keep all firearms in their “custody and control” at all times. Crew members or others not working with the guns are not allowed to touch them. If the armorer needs to go to the bathroom or take a break, they’re supposed to contact another armorer to relieve them. In this case, Collins said, since it was a low-budget film, Reed was the only armorer on set, so she should have asked someone from the props department to look after the guns so no one handled them if she needed a break.

Alec Baldwin’s fatal shooting occurred during a “cold gun” scene involving a real firearm, which has its own safety protocols.

Reed should have cleared the revolver herself to ensure it was not loaded. Then, she should have cleared or “proofed” the weapon for the assistant director. Then, she should have proofed the weapon for the “talent,” in this case Baldwin. After acknowledging the gun was clear, only then should Baldwin have accepted the gun from her.

“None of that was done with Baldwin,” Collins said. “He’s been on gun movies before. He knows the procedures. You don’t accept the gun from the assistant director, which was done here. You accept the gun only from the armorer.”

Clearing a single-action revolver like the one Baldwin used is a tedious process.

“You open the gate. The gun is on half-cock. You check each chamber – you check seven chambers to make sure you didn’t miss one. Then, you bring back the hammer and drop the hammer seven times, and then you do the same for the actor before you hand it to them,” Collins said.

“The talent has got to see that. They’ve got to know you’re safe. Lots of talent are afraid of firearms. You have to hold their hand a bit and keep them safe. You have to overdo it. When an armorer does everything they’re supposed to, the gun’s empty. Everyone’s checked it. We all know it’s safe. There’s no problem. We can relax. Everyone’s always in a hurry on set. They’re always behind schedule. They will try to rush you. You can’t allow that.”

During the “Rust” production, the armorer, Reed, was reportedly not allowed on set because of COVID-19 regulations.

“That’s bullshit if that’s true,” Collins said. “She screwed up and didn’t hand the gun to the talent because she wasn’t allowed to be there. There’s a cardinal rule: The armorer is responsible to clear the gun, clear it again, go to the talent and clear it again. That rule is never broken.”
This outstanding overview contains two key points...

The first agreed with a point I made earlier, the lead armorer couldn't/didn't stand up to the powers that be on the set and allowed standard practices to be violated. This put everyone at risk.

Single action revolvers (western style) aren't as easy to check clear as double actions since the cylinders don't swing open like more modern guns.

The last point is the crew recreationally shooting the prop guns. They are never supposed to leave the armorer's control.
You can tell a lot about the character of a man...
by the way he treats those who can do nothing for him.

I don't look back at the things I can no longer do, I just look forward to the things I still can.

User avatar
GunnyGene
Drover
Posts: 3005
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:15 am
Location: Monroe County, MS
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by GunnyGene » Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:49 pm

BrokenolMarine wrote:
Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:21 pm

This outstanding overview contains two key points...

The first agreed with a point I made earlier, the lead armorer couldn't/didn't stand up to the powers that be on the set and allowed standard practices to be violated. This put everyone at risk.

Single action revolvers (western style) aren't as easy to check clear as double actions since the cylinders don't swing open like more modern guns.

The last point is the crew recreationally shooting the prop guns. They are never supposed to leave the armorer's control.
There were so many screwups on that set (and leading up to it), that I suspect there was more than one person who was "under the influence". Pot, coke, and booze are favorite party favors in the Hollywood crowd.
Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes is rapidly becoming a reality (11/2023). Para Bellum.

User avatar
BrokenolMarine
Ranch Foreman
Posts: 7478
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 8:28 am
Location: South Central Oklahoma in the mountains
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by BrokenolMarine » Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:11 pm

Sadly, the daughter of Thell Reed, just starting her career has likely ended it by not having the backbone to stand up to those pushing her to go faster. Other information indicates she worked solo on other projects to meet budget when the standards indicated she should have had a minimum of two assistants. This caused her to rush even more to meet tight shooting schedules.
You can tell a lot about the character of a man...
by the way he treats those who can do nothing for him.

I don't look back at the things I can no longer do, I just look forward to the things I still can.

User avatar
clovishound
Drover
Posts: 2524
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 4:18 pm
Location: Summerville SC
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by clovishound » Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:13 pm

They have released the type of gun involved. It was a F Lee Pietta long colt 45 revolver.
There is, I think, humor here which does not translate well from English to sanity. - Sanya

GeoBoy
Cowhand
Posts: 434
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 3:24 pm
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by GeoBoy » Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:43 pm

It was senseless, they were rehearsing not filming. Why was a gun even present?
Henry Hoo1T

User avatar
markiver54
Deputy Marshal
Posts: 11130
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:49 am
Location: Biue Ridge Mountains, NC
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by markiver54 » Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:27 pm

markiver54 wrote:
Tue Oct 26, 2021 5:31 pm
RanchRoper wrote:
Mon Oct 25, 2021 9:55 pm
Anyone handling a firearm has a responsibility to prove it safe. The buck stops with Baldwin.
AMEN!
Nuf said IMO. Let's leave this be, and hopefully we'll see.
I'm your Huckleberry

Travlin
Cowboy
Posts: 1533
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 1:06 am

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by Travlin » Wed Oct 27, 2021 11:37 pm

To me it is just about as easy to pull the cylinder pin and remove the cylinder to check and make sure that it is empty.

User avatar
Vaquero
Ranch Boss
Posts: 12139
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 12:56 am
Location: Somewhere between Memphis & Nashville
United States of America

Re: Any thoughts on the prop gun incident?

Post by Vaquero » Thu Oct 28, 2021 5:42 pm

BrokenolMarine wrote:
Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:21 pm
GunnyGene wrote:
Wed Oct 27, 2021 12:00 pm
More is coming to light from professional armorers:

Excerpt:



Clearing a single-action revolver like the one Baldwin used is a tedious process.



This outstanding overview contains two key points...

The first agreed with a point I made earlier, the lead armorer couldn't/didn't stand up to the powers that be on the set and allowed standard practices to be violated. This put everyone at risk.

Single action revolvers (western style) aren't as easy to check clear as double actions since the cylinders don't swing open like more modern guns.

The last point is the crew recreationally shooting the prop guns. They are never supposed to leave the armorer's control.
I agree that it's not as-AS easy as a DA revolver, but it only takes a few seconds to pop open the loading latch, and slowly spin the cylinder.
Come on.

RP
Monte Walsh "You have No idea how little I care". :lol:

Ain't No Apologies for My Temperament :shock:
Si vis pacem, para bellum
H001, H006, H012

Post Reply