What forensic testing reveals about revolver in on-set '''Rust''' shooting - ABC News
Well hopefully that puts alot of the bull dung to rest.
Well hopefully that puts alot of the bull dung to rest.
Alec Baldwin, FBI
- Thread starter zeke
- Start date
- Status
Register to hide this ad
I had been doing a good job of keeping his name out of my head.
Until now.
Until now.
<sarcasm on>
The gun could not be fired without pulling the trigger in the quarter cock, half cock or full cock positions? I'm just shocked by that finding! Guns go off all by themselves all the time.
<sarcasm off>
It's still gross negligence. Reed, as the person in charge of the firearms on the production and on set, should have personally verified it was unloaded before handing it to Baldwin. Baldwin as the actor who would be pointing it at another actor, as well as potentially at cameramen and crew, should have personally confirmed it was unloaded as well.
That's just basic firearm safety.
jag312
Member
Is anyone surprised?
Good actor.
Terrible human being.
Terrible human being.
He's obviously trying hard to prove it's not his fault. But now he's caught in a lie. Yes he pulled the trigger. He would have been better off playing stupid which he is, and just said they handed me a loaded gun. I'm an actor how should I know it's loader……… I'm not saying that's a good excuse but honesty trumps lies in court.
'..... With the hammer in the quarter- and half-cock positions, the gun "could not be made to fire without a pull of the trigger," the report stated.....'
Did they mis-speak or word that badly when they said that?
It seems to imply that WITH a pull on the trigger, the revolver WOULD fire from either 1/4 or 1/2 cock.
Or am I only reading it wrong?
That would also mean that the 1/4 & 1/2 cock notches were damaged or out of spec allowing it to fire.
That the notches are fragile and can break is well known. But if in good order and nothing wrong or out of spec, a pull on the trigger should not drop the hammer from either 1/4 or 1/2 cock.
At 1/4cock,,the cylinder is locked in position with a chamber (cartridge) under the hammer. If the 1/4cock fails, it is possible for the hammer to have enough force to fire the cartridge that is in line with it.
At 1/2 cock the cylinder is free wheeling. At the 1/2cock point of the hammer rotation, no cartridge is directly under the hammer/firing pin. But the free wheeling aspect of the mechanism/cylinder can easily bring one into allaignment with the handling of the revolver.
A hammer drop from a 1/2cock position that fails would fire a cartridge
in most circumstances if it was allaigned with the hammer/firingpin.
Did they mis-speak or word that badly when they said that?
It seems to imply that WITH a pull on the trigger, the revolver WOULD fire from either 1/4 or 1/2 cock.
Or am I only reading it wrong?
That would also mean that the 1/4 & 1/2 cock notches were damaged or out of spec allowing it to fire.
That the notches are fragile and can break is well known. But if in good order and nothing wrong or out of spec, a pull on the trigger should not drop the hammer from either 1/4 or 1/2 cock.
At 1/4cock,,the cylinder is locked in position with a chamber (cartridge) under the hammer. If the 1/4cock fails, it is possible for the hammer to have enough force to fire the cartridge that is in line with it.
At 1/2 cock the cylinder is free wheeling. At the 1/2cock point of the hammer rotation, no cartridge is directly under the hammer/firing pin. But the free wheeling aspect of the mechanism/cylinder can easily bring one into allaignment with the handling of the revolver.
A hammer drop from a 1/2cock position that fails would fire a cartridge
in most circumstances if it was allaigned with the hammer/firingpin.
UncleEd
Member
In movie making as I understand it,
use of firearms ultimately lies with
the armorer(s)/asst. director(s) and
this not only includes the main
actors but all the extras who may
be handling firearms.
In this tragedy, Baldwin does not
bear final responsibility for the
firearm.
use of firearms ultimately lies with
the armorer(s)/asst. director(s) and
this not only includes the main
actors but all the extras who may
be handling firearms.
In this tragedy, Baldwin does not
bear final responsibility for the
firearm.
I thought the same thing. Maybe we both read it wrong
Alec Baldwin Claim He Didn't Pull Trigger Corroborated By DA: Report - Rolling Stone
Am hoping some shade falls down on this person as well.
Am hoping some shade falls down on this person as well.
It seems to be pretty well agreed that he wasn't cleaning the gun. Maybe he should get some witnesses that he was just starting to turn his life around.
Chubbs103
US Veteran
I think it was poorly worded but have think the implication is that the safety and 1/2 cock notches were working as designed to include stopping the hammer if released prior to the hammer's full engagement with the sear.
On a SAA clone used in movies, I would be highly suspect of the condition of these notches. "Fanning" the hammer is common in westerns and tends to be very hard on the hammer notches.
On a SAA clone used in movies, I would be highly suspect of the condition of these notches. "Fanning" the hammer is common in westerns and tends to be very hard on the hammer notches.
1BadSmith
Member
What day is the FBI raiding his mansion??
I don't understand what the import of this latest report is supposed to be.
I think Baldwin was clearly careless, from a gun guy's point of view, but I sincerely doubt he was trying to murder his director.
I guess the import is supposed to be that he said, "I never pulled the trigger." Maybe he did. Maybe he is lying about it. Or, maybe he did, and just doesn't remember pulling the trigger. Or, maybe, he pulled the hammer back to full cock, with the trigger depressed, and the hammer slipped.
But, in any of the above scenarios, what difference does it make?
I think Baldwin was clearly careless, from a gun guy's point of view, but I sincerely doubt he was trying to murder his director.
I guess the import is supposed to be that he said, "I never pulled the trigger." Maybe he did. Maybe he is lying about it. Or, maybe he did, and just doesn't remember pulling the trigger. Or, maybe, he pulled the hammer back to full cock, with the trigger depressed, and the hammer slipped.
But, in any of the above scenarios, what difference does it make?
Perhaps the import is the FBI directly contradicting all those saying the gun could have fired without pulling the trigger. Like all those alec tv performances and especially the da reportedly responsible for bringing any charges.
"An informal experiment conducted by the top prosecutor now weighing possible criminal charges in the deadly Rust shooting reportedly found that Alec Baldwin's claim he didn't pull the trigger isn't as far-fetched as it might sound."
Talk about trying to influence a future jury pool for how long now?
The previous Baldwin shooting threads were locked for a reason.
He's simply not worth our time…
He's simply not worth our time…
- Status
