comment: >
  
  The armorer drilled incredibly tiny holes in real bullets and would hold them up to her ear to shake them and listen to see if they were live.
  She also brought live rounds to set and shot the prop guns
  Predictably enough, she put live rounds in a gun and took it to set.
  There's no way anyone could have reliably known if it was real bullets or not.
  Which is why no one else does it that way.
  But weeks before the shooting the armorer gave an interview about how she knew better than safety procedures because her dad used to be an armorer.
context: I still don't under why there was live ammunition there on the first place >
  
  They were shooting live rounds from the gun during breaks. Would say the armour is 80/90% to blame for being live rounds. >
  
  If you believe the armorer though, she claims that the dummy rounds they received were defective and there were live rounds mixed in.  Still on her though as she should have tested the box and thrown it all away if she found even a single defect. >
  
  Considering how inexperienced and incompetent she was doing her job,  overall,  in the context of a badly run set to begin with, this strains credulity, but it needs to be thoroughly investigated. Can’t dismiss the possibility. 
  I thought Baldwin was less culpable than the assistant director and the armorer and whoever hired those two >
  
  I think he's catching some of it because he's was a producer on the movie. >
  
  Actually, after talking about this with various people, it is anyone whose hands were on the gun, anyone holding the gun and their responsibility when so doing, so that’s the basis. 
  I think law enforcement tried really hard to get this right and so far I think they mostly have, but I think Baldwin should have been charged only with a misdemeanor, such as reckless use or something. I still don’t think the police understand how hard the actors and everyone on the set has to depend on the AD and armorer. There are hardcore procedures abc if they are followed they are almost ironclad, but the AD and armorer were the worst I have ever heard of. I would have walked off that set were I working on it, and Baldwin probably should have called a halt and stepped up. There were complaints - he had to be aware of that.
  Yeah, so in that sense, his being a producer, even if only nominally, mattered. As the lead actor and even a nominal producer, he should have stopped the show days before this happened. >
  
  I think the police absolutely have not got it right.  The assistant director (whose job it is to supervise the set so the Armorer technically reports to him) is the one who took the gun off a prop cart, called it a cold gun without checking it, and gave it to Alec Baldwin.  He broke so many workplace safety rules there and he should know them since he's been fired before for an accidental gun discharge on a different set.
  He is getting one misdemeanor for negligence with a suspended 6 month sentence of probation.  That is ludicrous. >
  
  Baldwin has more than a fighting chance. The case against him, based on the facts revealed so far, appears ludicrous. This is a political stunt and/or grandstanding. >
  
  Not sure it’s a political stunt but it sure is a wobbly case. Multiple  witnesses, multiple, heard Halls say the gun was cold, and in separate interviews pretty much the day it happened, no coordination of stories, people with no motive to lie, and he fooled the Santa Fe Police? What tools.
  EDIT: Halls sure knew how to play those detectives, and it’s just one more thing about him pointing to secrets about him yet to be revealed. There is something very odd about him >
  
  Friendly reminder to NOT speak to police without a lawyer present.
  Ever. >
  
  I think trauma can do a lot to people in the moment and you're not always thinking very clearly. 
  He probably felt an immense amount of guilt immediately after she was shot & he probably was eager to off-load that feeling by telling his story and clearing his name. 
  Waiting for a lawyer is the smart & logical move, but we don't always behave logically in these moments. >
  
  I don’t even know if it’s just that he felt guilty - he probably really wanted to find out wtf happened himself. He’s not only “in shock” but also, like……
  Um, I want to know how the hell this happened - I’ve been in a million shoots and never seen a live shot fired. I want to give them every piece of information while it’s fresh so that they can figure it out.  
  I really don’t know what this does for him personally but all the comments trashing him - like, if he wanted to just “get away with it” he would have shut up.  Just watching the interview and it seems clear to me (though I’m not a living polygraph) he wants to help them do their investigation and find out why this happened. >
  
  
  Um, I want to know how the hell this happened - I’ve been in a million shoots and never seen a live shot fired. I want to give them every piece of information while it’s fresh so that they can figure it out. 
  
  According to the DA, it was Baldwin's own conduct and reckless behavior, not following best practices etc.
  
  
  Baldwin was not present for required firearms training
  After failing to show up to this training, he received a 30-minute on-set training during which he was distracted talking to his family on the phone
  He exhibited "reckless behaviour" in the lead up to Hutchins's death
  He had pointed the firearm at Hutchins in the lead up to the incident violating gun safety rules
  Baldwin had not performed the required safety checks with Gutierrez-Reed
  He broke protocol by letting Gutierrez-Reed leave the church set
  He did not deal with safety complaints on set
  He did not use a replica firearm for the unscheduled rehearsal
  He allowed the hiring of Gutierrez-Reed, who had worked on just one production before the movie, which showed he "failed to demand the minimum safety standards, protocols, and requirements on set" >
  
  Yikes... Obviously it's still a freak accident but that paints it a bit differently >
  
  Not so much a freak accident as an incompetent Armorer.  I believe the final responsibility ultimately rests with the guy pulling the trigger, but this was the 3RD time a gun that was declared by the armorer to be "cold" (i.e. unloaded or loaded with dummy rounds) accidentally had live ammo and went off.  Thankfully the other two times they were blanks, but that still shows an incredible amount of negligence by both the armorer, and Baldwin for not canning her ass. 
  I don't know if I think Baldwin deserves prison time.  The armorer certainly does, but Baldwin's variety of negligence was a more passive kind than bringing live ammo onto a movie set and failing to check guns before handing them off multiple times. >
  
  Why was there live ammo anywhere around the set? Crazy. >
  
  That’s the question that needs answering, why was live ammo on the set and who brought it? >
  
  I don't know how substantiated the details of the matter was, but a long while ago there were reports that explained how the bullet got into the mix.
  One, Gutierrez-Reed's father Thell Reed was an armourer who had a friendship with one of his suppliers. Gutierrez-Reed had her ammunition supplied from her father's stock.
  From what the reports talked about, this friend/supplier who took some Starline Brass bullets (Starline only makes the casings) and turned them into live ammunition. The two then went shooting to try them out, and some of the bullets remained with Thell Reed, and somehow supposedly got mixed into the rest and his daughter took them on set for her work.
  I think investigations went as far as to search the supplier for evidence, but no modified ammunition was found in his possession at the time.
  Anyway because supposedly Gutierrez-Reed thought Starline Brass didn't make any live ammunition, which is technically true, she then didn't think to check or validate that the ammunition loaded wasn't live. Basically incompetence and putting others at risk by everyone involved - but unlikely to be any malicious intention by any party. 
  This is all from memory, because this stuff was all reported on like over a year ago now. So I may be off on details here and there - and it's only based on media reports at the time which I think were based on people's accounts of the situation. So not to be taken with any degree of historical accuracy. >
  
  There is a reason why Baldwin is being charged with involuntary manslaughter as opposed to manslaughter.
  From the CNN article:
  
  Baldwin did not take firearm training on the “Rust” movie set seriously, prosecutors said in probable cause documents outlining evidence in the case.
  “A training session for at least an hour or more in length was scheduled, but the actual training consisted of only approximately 30 minutes as according to (armorer Hannah Gutierrez) Reed, Baldwin was distracted and talking on his cell phone to his family during the training,” the document states. >
  
  Actor here. I've worked on several high budget TV productions where I've had to shoot firearms.  I've never received any kind of formal training. This is not status quo. Armorer shows up, gives you the gun, tells you how it works, not to point it at anyone, shows you the ammo, tells you they're blanks- how the fuck would I know? Ok? The A.D signs off on it and action. >
  
  Yeah I’m not an actor but it seems crazy to me that it would ever be the actors job to make sure there aren’t live rounds in a gun on set. >
  
  Exactly! It’s a movie set you assume whoever is bringing that on set is doing their job. >
  
  I don’t know the specifics of this situation obviously as I wasn’t there, but no actor should be reasonably expected to have any doubts about using a gun as intended for a scene. It feels like I hand you a remote controller and ask you to turn on the tv. As you press the power button there’s an explosion outside and I now call you a murderer. “Did you even check that wasn’t a remote to set off a bomb?” Ridiculous. In that situation I’m the guilty party and you’re one of my victims. >
  
  Here is my question, are all 5 producers being charged or just Alec Baldwin? Because if they don't charge all of them, he's going to get off by passing blame to one of the other producers. >
  
  Yeah this is the part I have a hard time following.  I've seen it suggested that his negligence / culpability is not as an actor rehearsing the scene, but rather as a producer because gun safety on the set wasn't handled properly.  But if that's the case, why aren't the other producers being charged too? >
  
  My understanding from the time of the shooting was that Baldwin specifically was asked by crew members about increasing gun safety on set (which included the armorer herself asking to receive more training when it comes to guns or for someone more experienced to be hired to handle them) and he ignored it.  However I don't have a recent source and would prefer to state this as old info and say it would be best if everyone just waits to learn about the decision making and evidence found that will likely be released soon. >
  
  She sort of has a point. If her training didn't include tidbits like "don't bring live ammunition," she definitely needed better training. >
  
  Trying to kill someone? Bring live ammunition.
  Not trying to kill someone? Don't do the above.
  How fucking hard could it be!? >
  
  Who has admitted to bringing the bullets? >
  
  Nobody. The armorer is trying to shift blame and claims the company that supplied the dummy rounds slipped some live rounds into the box. Crew members on set claim she brought ammo and was target shooting with it. >
  
  
  she brought ammo and was target shooting with it
  
  Why isn't she being charged then?? >
  
  I believe she is. In a case like this where multiple people had to mess up, they all get charged. Alec's just the big fish story. >
  
  Prediction:
  
  Baldwin found not guilty for inv. manslaughter
  Reed found guilty for inv. manslaughter
  The production (and Baldwin) then sued successfully for wrongful death by the family of the deceased >
  
  The third has already happened and they settled out. I’m banking that they both are found guilty. Baldwin really screwed himself over by giving the police interviews without a lawyer and then multiple television interviews… without a lawyer. >
  
  From everything that has been published, it seems like the armorer actually should take  more of the blame. Live rounds should never have been on the set. Baldwin, needs to take some of the blame, due to his mismanagement of the movie set. Like every accident, there is usually multiple points of failure. I am do not know how you can break it down legally, but the armorer should take 60% of the blame, the director not checking the weapon or calling over the armorer over to check the weapon and Baldwin for mismanagement of the movie set. No one in this chain of events should get off without any repercussions. >
  
  She may have simply forgotten to remove the live rounds after target shooting with other crew the night before. People forget their own children in cars at times, with disastrous consequences. It's not inconceivable that she forgot to switch them out. >
  
  My understanding is that industry standard is live rounds are never  into a prop gun. Ever. The act of target shooting the night before with the prop gun would constitute gross negligence if that's the case. Negligence that leads to death is manslaughter. >
  
  I worked law enforcement, and our guns we used for training on each other or with each other had a safety built into the barrel. So that even if a live round was introduced it would never be able to exit the barrel. >
  
  Who the heck thought that was a good idea!? Cops and robbers with anything more than a water pistol is asking for a bad time. >
  
  I've seen movies make dinosaurs walk the earth again.. why are there rounds on a movie set at all ? 
  They can't just add them to the cylinder in post? >
  
  Sure, but practical is much cheaper. >
  
  I’m trying to remember what Vice President Dick Cheney got charged with when he was hunting and shot someone. Oh yeah…he wasn’t charged at all. It was just dumb luck the guy didn’t die when he was shot in the the head. Gun safety is so important. >
  
  not only dick cheney shoot that guy in the face, he also apologized later... to dick cheney.   
  absolutely insane >
  
  Wait, what do you mean he apologized to himself? >
  
  The guy Dick Cheney shot apologized to Dick Cheney >
  
  Why? What did he say? Also, why?? >
  
  IIRC he apologized for “stepping into Cheneys shooting lane” >
  
  I’m having a r/glitchinthematrix moment: didn’t he already get charged? >
  
  No they announced weeks ago they were going to bring charges/consider charges. >
  
  Is thr armourer and AD also being charged with manslaughter? >
  
  think the AD already pleaded no-contest to his charges >
  
  As they should, they screwed up big time. >
  
  Being held to a higher level of scrutiny than actual cops. >
  
  I never thought about that. Crazy. >
  
  I just want to know how an actor is supposed to know the difference between fake and live rounds?