Hollywood Prop Masters and Armorers discuss TRAGIC prop gun accident.

[@mitchellradspinner4491]

Thanks for the edited down version!

[@TheSuzberry]

Protocol video is very informative and well done.

[@jondellar]

As a former firearms dealer, what always gives me the habdabs is when there's no on-screen trigger discipline by characters in a film. It's getting better nowadays, thankfully.

[@Headcase650]

The biggest unanswered question is where did those live rounds come from. We know that they were starline brass with nickel primers. My understanding is that starline does not manufacture live ammunition. To me it seems grossly irresponsible to reload starline brass into a live round. Is that a normal practice? We know from interviews and testimony that a guy named Joe Swanson reloaded a bunch of ammunition for the training camp of 1883. We know that Seth Kenny took a green ammo can of leftover live ammunition from that training camp. We know that Seth Kenny's assistant started collecting and disposed of ammunition from the rust set immediately after the accident. We know Seth Kenny's warehouse wasn't searched for 3 weeks. To me it seems plausible that those live rounds could have come from Seth Kenny's Prop House. Yet the investigators never pursued that wholeheartedly. Why would a guy that runs a prop house have any reason to have live ammunition?

[@SynchronizorVideos]

As a gun owner and handloader, Starline is a major manufacturer of brass cases for the reloading market. You see their empty cases in stores all the time, and so it’s not at all uncommon to see live ammunition with the Starline headstamp. Nothing wrong with making dummies from Starline brass, or any other brand of brass. Any such dummies should get standard safety features added like drilling holes in the case walls or adding a rattle, to clearly identify them as dummies. And of course there should be ZERO live ammunition anywhere near a film set that could potentially be mixed-in.

[@propguy72]

I loved being on this panel with all of you.

[@bjarkeistruppedersen8213]

I like how the puns and dad jokes are missing - this is not a thing to be joking around with 🙂

[@charles_king]

Yeah, it's mind-blowing

[@jeav4820]

🤯

[@nealedgel3319]

Dutch’s comments about the first AD being in charge of both efficiency on set AND safety and how those two interests often conflict is maybe the most important takeaway from all of this.

[@petergerdes1094]

This was really great and I'd also observe that It's really important to distinguish Industry safety standards from what criminal law requires. We want industries to volountarily adopt higher standards than the legal minimum and if doing so *creates* legal liability for the people in that industry it incentivizes lower standards and I don't believe it does. I feel like people keep confusing the issue of whether there was a safety rule that was broken and whether that violation falls below the legal minimum care required.

[@pluviosity]

Thank you for the upload! Been waiting for it. Despite the dismissed trial, I still think the discussion is relevant. Godknows people's perception to Baldwin and firearm handling in movies are forever changed now.

[@carrollsanders9376]

@@pluviosity All because one person probably forgot to unload live rounds from a lever action Rifle, before it went back to the set of 1883.

[@petergerdes1094]

I think you overestimate people's memory and concern. Give it two years and some good PR for Baldwin and people will forget.

[@pluviosity]

​@@petergerdes1094I doubt that. And I don't mean how people think Baldwin is good/bad person, but how this incident would forever stick to his name. It's history. It's not something that a PR team could easily changed. Years later maybe it'd only live in Wikipedia article, but there would always be "oh, that actor that shot someone?" quip. Not to mention people, even some from film industry, started asking why we still have real firearms in movie.

[@Dorgpoop]

What I'm getting from this video is that using blank firing guns on set is extremely safe when the proper procedures are followed, but extremely unsafe when an inexperienced armourer doesn't bother with them. Maybe the industry just needs to be stricter on who is allowed to be hired as an armourer for a film. Perhaps some sort of official certification or licence should be required.

[@blackheartedpearl]

I was assistant armorer on Spike TV's Deadliest Warrior for 2 of 3 seasons under Master Armorer, Gary Harper. We had live, blank and dummy rounds on set. Each ammo can was clearly marked and no one but an Armorer was allowed to touch the ammo. No ammo was ever not under control. The fact that we shot (pun intended) this show and there were ZERO accidents says a lot for our lead, Gary Harper, and his assistants., Mike Gilliland and Victoria "Tori" Wagner.

[@BrayTube]

Great panel and a very interesting and informed discussion. Thanks.

[@mochajohnson4780]

Amiguity while identifying dummy rounds might lead to a situation where live rounds get misidentified. I was the prop master and armorer for a similarly budgeted western shot in LA a few years ago. I rented guns and gun accessories from a well regarded company. During the course of filming, I came across several dummy rounds that had been filled with a bunch of steel shot (#5 or smaller) instead of a single large pellet. The sound they make when shaken is very similar to the sound that SOME live cartridges make, notably older style rimmed ammo that is loaded with large grain, slower burning powders like you would use with guns that predate smokeless powder. Differentiating between them may be pretty easy for someone with years of experience shooting vintage guns and reloading ammo, but it would be problematic for anyone less versed. Imagine a situation where someone has learned that "sometimes" dummy rounds sound like this but has no idea that "sometimes" live rounds do too. I consider myself reasonably competent in those areas, and when I would find those rounds on set, I was fairly confident that what I was hearing was turkey shot. "Fairly confident" is not enough, so I pulled them from the production. Was this even a factor in the "Rust" situation? I have no idea, but either way, I think it's an accident waiting to happen. How often have yall run across "turkey shot" dummy rounds?

[@HenryLoenwind]

In another comment, someone said that rounds with those brand marks are only manufactured as dummies. In this case, misidentification would be easy when you don't expect someone to reload those with a real payload.

[@keithg1313]

Excellent coverage. This is a bow tie on the whole safety part of the industry.

[@CallousCoder]

I am so saddened that this even could occur. I’ve worked on productions here in NL and the more gun Cavelier US. Nowhere would’ve or could’ve this happened. My longtime best friend in the US he was an armorer and licensed gun smith. He also said that the moment actual guns were onset that could fire and were fired, the production should’ve been stopped. Funny story, he did a show and tell after I came of NCiS New Orleans Halloween special( I took him along as my “assistent”) since he got me started in the US and we could spend 5 days after my little gig hanging around the city. So the next morning after we came home from a nice holiday, he does a show and tell of some of his weird conversion. And I grab the Glock from the stack. And he’s like: “be extra extra, careful with that! It’s, loaded and chambered! It’s on safe but be extra warned!” So I eject the magazine, eject the chambered round and put it in the magazine. And he says in Ernst: “thanks for the thumbprint!” I was like: “what?” -“nothing just thank you for your dna and thumbprint” 😂 I joked: “so the next time I come into the US, and do the fingerprint thing at the customs, I’d be arrested for a crime I didn’t commit”. -“I don’t know what you are talking about….. that’s called plausible deniability” 😂

[@claire2088]

there had already been two accidental discharges on that set though, as much as Baldwin would know that guns on sets are theoretically never loaded he'd also know that on *that* set they had in fact been loaded twice

[@lseh]

28:39 this here is exactly the problem.. "took too long", "not acceptable". "waste of time" mentality. For the number of guns on rust, having a barely part time amourer I can see the mentality on set to be "hurry up". People get too used this experienced amourers and stop questioning and expect less experiences amourers to be able to handle what experienced amourers are able to do. Look at how many guns had to be checked by her every time cut was called. That seemed insane to me. Don't get me wrong, I feel like she was cauky but add in "Alex" type personalities and you have disaster on your hand... For peetsake, the camera crew walked off. That set should have been shut down until issues were addressed and corrected. They all played a role. So much went wrong. Also add in rumor that there was ammo shortage and they were potentially pressured to figure out the inventory issue by possibility making dummies or blanks from live ammo. 🤯

[@TJtemplar]

Nicely done and well put together

[@charlesje1966]

This was very interesting. I've never really thought about the industry behind gun props and how the culture of safety is really the question at issue rather than mechanics.

[@christibritton1436]

Perhaps removing 'weapon' from movie set vernacular reduced the alertness to danger in handling a firearm. I was taught early on that 'all weapons are loaded' ESPECIALLY when you think they are not. And to never point a gun at anything you don't intend to destroy. Reducing that alertness to possible dangers in an environment where it is ESSENTIAL to have non-lethal rounds, seems to me to add to an attitude of 'it's safe to play with and I don't need to follow these silly rules'. I was actually on Alec Baldwins side - that it was the responsibility of the prop handlers - but if the color of the primer is a clue to lethality, and Baldwin has handled set props for years, then why didn't he recognize the primers? Still at least 75% of the responsibility is the prop master who allowed live rounds on set. re: drop test. I have particpated in Single Action Shooting Society events. My partner had several late 1800 replica handguns - the firing pin does not rest on a cartridge, they have modern safety mechanisms that guard against dropping. I understand this is by law. Also historical ie not replicas firearms, can have safety mechanisms installed by licensed gun smiths. Applause for an excellent review of the issues with the unfortunate incident.

[@lllllREDACTEDlllll]

It wasn't Baldwins job. The last thing firearms prop masters want is stupid actors messing with the firearms once the propmasters have vetted them. I will say that (A) No live rounds should ever be on set anyway and (B) No firearms on set should be capable of firing a live round. There is just no need for it. The barrels can be made safe by installing a pin that prevents live rounds from being inserted in ssaid firearms and / or blocked from the bullet traveling through the barrel. As for Baldwins responsibility... None. Everyone that learned gun safety is now some kind of expert... Your not. Trade gun for a glass window. So Baldwin throws someone through a glass window but... Opps real glass and it cuts his co-actors head off... Hey interweb experts, we all know your not supposed to throw people through windows in real life... Maybe real glass is a tad more blue than fake glass... Who cares, it's not on the actor to make that call. This is the whole reason PropMasters exist. If not just make actors take years of training and apprenticeships so we can hold them responsible for sourcing their own props and can hold them personally liable for any bad decisions made on set. That is all, carry on.

[@christibritton1436]

@@lllllREDACTEDlllll I stand corrected. I was taught to always be aware, but with acting the PropMaster and Armorer are paid to be the actors awareness of safe handling of firearms - making each person on set - which could be hundreds - responsible for each firearm use would be ludicrous.

[@IanZainea1990]

Great video/discussion

[@ZipplyZane]

You have a short that has Cancelled on the thumbnail. I thought it was going to be about this trial and thus your coverage of it. I had really been looking forward to it, but then I had family stuff and by the time I checked in, the case was over

[@cynicalrabbit915]

After the accident on the "Rust" set and the many unsubstantiated sequence of events started making the rounds of the Internet, the information I latched onto was: 1 - The Armorer's cart was unattended 2 - Supposedly the 1st AD retrieved the gun from the Armorer's cart, took to the set, handed it to Baldwin, then declared "Cold Gun On Set" If this is what happened, then the AD violated protocol. The other thing I heard via the Internet was this 1st AD had a history of unsafe practices on several other movies. Now whether it was gun safety or other safety protocols wasn't included in the internet rumors. But when the local DA first announced that they were charging Baldwin with a manslaughter charge, solely because he was holding the gun and a live round had been fired, sounded like it was politically motivated. How do you prosecute an actor for doing their job, and accidently ending someone's life? To do that the person you're prosecuting would have to know that was a possibility they could injure or end their life, and they acted recklessly.

[@deptofcarstereorepair]

thanks for this, it was very insightful.

[@Big_Un]

I really appreciate you all being thorough. I really do! Thank you!! However, there's only ONE thing that is critical in this situation: The implement was NOT CONTROLLED by the responsible party!!! Yes, you can argue that there were live rounds on set, which is incomprehensible to me, BUT if the responsible party had performed their duties CORRECTLY, this could NEVER have occurred. (For those in the industry: "You can't fire the grip if the focus puller didn't do their job!") EVERYTHING after that is irrelevant! EVEN IF Mr Baldwin WERE an expert handler, it was not his job to control the implement. It was the job of ONE person to have control of that piece of equipment, and THAT person failed in the performance of their duty.

[@sabueso344]

Exactly, Baldwin was an actor doing HIS job where others failed to do theirs.

[@ridgiedidgie4444]

Dutch you have just made the “actor not checking the gun” a reasonable decision. Thank you (~19:15)

[@bufordhighwater9872]

I have to completely disagree with not calling a gun a weapon. The gun is a tool created for one purpose, to end life efficiently. And I can't think of any other tools specifically developed for that reason that we wouldn't call a weapon. It wasn't created for play or competition. It was created to take life. Not calling a weapon or avoiding that word is both disingenuous and intellectually dishonest. The fact a gun is a weapon is the very reason we take gun safety so seriously. If a person isn't comfortable thinking about guns as weapons, it's the responsibility of a trainer or armorer to teach them to be comfortable handling a weapon. Telling them it's not really a weapon or not to think of it as a weapon is a lie. A lie which can create a false sense of safety. Whereas teaching someone to be comfortable with handling a weapon should increase safety,

[@FUnzzies1]

This is incredibly ignorant. Knives were made to kill people, but we use it in the kitchen. Should only call knives weapons that only exist to kill people? No. You would never say that. Guns exist for a breadth of uses ONE of those uses is killing people. It can be used for self protection against individuals and the government, hunting, competition shooting, flat range shooting, or just cause. Saying that they exist only to kill people is propaganda.

[@pseudonymous9153]

He's one of those gun nuts that causes the continued avoidable deaths of thousands of children in his country. "No one's going to get hurt" he says while being interviewed ABOUT A DEATH FROM A PROP WEAPON!

[@MsBrendalina]

100% agree. Refusing to use the word "weapon" may result in the crew/actors taking the firearm less seriously and slacking off on safety. One of the first things they teach CHILDREN about gun safety is to respect the fact that a gun is a WEAPON. So why does this prop guy think its cute to tell adult actors to treat the thing like a prop?

[@MichelleChristine-k2z]

What do you think of props shaped like a gun but does NOT take gas or dummy rounds, any other rounds? How should those be handled?

[@khadijapetlele2012]

I also found that disingenuous. If you are a cook, you KNOW a knife can cut you, you KNOW a stove can burn you, pretending that they won't simply because you have the competence to use these tools effectively does not make them less dangerous. You need to acknowledge them as dangerous to be able to work with them safely.

[@travischarlebois4674]

This is awesome

[@Joe30101]

I have seen people who have polished the inner workings of their western six guns to a mirror finish. MAKEING A HAIR TRIGGER. We will never know because of this stupid test.

[@CallousCoder]

Here in NL/Europe things are obviously more safe because w had (as far as I know) no accidents at least not in the last 40 years. Even on a magic tv show where we did the bullet catch with a real looking fire arm a licensed and certified armorer needed to be there.

[@carrollsanders9376]

When you realize the Live Rifle rounds might have been in a Lever Action Rifle on 1883, in Sam Elliott's hands, it changes the dynamics of this situation.

[@ThePWNDR]

Can you explain what you mean

[@thewhitewolf58]

Honestly feel like it was the prop master or armors issue. You hire someone to do a job so that it lessens your work load.

[@amaruqlonewolf3350]

I'm not sure what's the point of a drop test when the actual question is why there were live rounds present on the set. I'm pretty sure it's a felony to tamper with the evidence and potentially damage it too, though I'm not familiar with how the American laws are.

[@GorVala]

This already happened folks with Bruce Lees son.. Brandon Lee on set of Crow the movie 😢

[@KawaiiCat2]

There was no training back then and during break they were messing around with the gun.

[@D_M_S_4]

Scott is amazing.

[@DarkwinterWolf]

I do have a genuine question for Scott, I understand having actual firing weapons on set, but with all the modern non-firing or replica's out on the market, why are they not used more?

[@MsBrendalina]

This confuses me as well. Why take the risk of using actual firearms when replicas and special effects can easily simulate gunfire? Even if these kinds of tragic shooting accidents are rare, why take a chance?

[@peterclarke7006]

I don't know the answer, but a wild stab in the dark, based on years of working in health and safety in all manner of industries, is this: People don't like change nearly as much as they don't like being told what to do. I imagine there's a lot of big, brittle egos in the film industry and, I hate to say it, a lot of machismo, all of which is a recipe for disaster in any industry, but particularly those that add firearms into the mix. Sadly, it takes someone actually being killed, and a famous actor threatened with a prison sentence, to get people to accept that it's just not worth the risk to have real weapons on set unless there is an EXTREMELY good reason. Every Health and Safety rule is written in blood, and I can't imagine the film industry is much different, unfortunately.

[@Chicky_Lumps]

If I'm not mistaken, don't they generally use a mix of both real and replica firearms, only using real ones with blanks when they need to be fired?

[@petergerdes1094]

Wasn't checking via the BB sound test literally one of the things that the armorer was critisized for relying on (and the police)?

[@LangstonDev]

Scott did you write that intro for yourself?

[@TheSuzberry]

Too low key. He would have made his introduction more pun embellished.

[@ScottPropandRoll]

No I didn’t.

[@TylerDollarhide]

Thanks for reminding me, and everyone, that when an actor is also a "producer", it's only in name. They don't really have the same responsibilities or duties of a regular producer, thus Baldwin wouldn't have been involved in checking the gun.

[@wrnrt]

Aaaaand it's back. Why?

[@lllllREDACTEDlllll]

I'm going to become a magician. Work my way up to a big time Las Vegas show, just so I can trick an audience member in coming up on stage. I'm going to hand him a real chainsaw not the prop one I usually use. Then I will have said audience member cut my assistant in half FOR REAL! Sucks to be him, He should have made sure the chainsaw and the box were part of a magic trick because ABRACADABRA! You're going to prison. We all know Billy Bob from the internets took a chainsaw safety class.

[@nomusicrc]

Why did you reupload this

[@ScottPropandRoll]

Technical issues with the link to the unedited livestream at the end. Thanks for your understanding

[@tristankline6676]

Super good video

[@lough1959]

Didn’t John Erik Hexum accidentally kill himself by shooting himself point blank in the head with a blank on the set of “Cover Up”? It was sometime in the ‘80s on the Fox lot, I was on an adjoining stage.

[@SHANECatLovinActivistHistorian]

UNFORGIVEN AND open range, the last two movies i ever saw in the theater

[@MeganSpruce90]

Just came across this page today.. after the Hannah Gutierrez case, as well as after the Baldwin trial. Wish i had some insight before, but watching all these experts just solidified my feelings on the whole thing. Especially when a panelist or two mentioned the first AD never should've gotten that deal. He copped out and took little to no responsibility here..and as much as I sort of felt Baldwin was guilty here, simply by pulling the trigger which resulted in a loss of life...I also felt if all things were properly in place here, which he presumed they were, this never would have happened. Im all for justice, but seeing Baldwins trial end in a mistrial (to the fault of the prosecutor) was a proper ending here. Though, I'd love to see them track down exactly how those live rounds got on set.

[@Spoodabandit]

I was slightly confused what mark meant about the bb being in the dummy round that’s a terrible way to identify a “dummy round” Kuz gunpowder may sound like that to the untrained ear or in a louder environment can easily be confused I hope that’s what mark was getting at and it being a safety precaution otherwise I’m saying this for no reason Kuz that is a very bad precaution and could’ve been used and someone did the ear test and that’s that

[@TheAmtwhite]

But was Alex Baldwin acting as if he was a producer? Not just an actor in the film?

[@carrollsanders9376]

@@TheAmtwhite Pickles stated in Court it was her set, she was in Charge, and all stars act like Aholes, except for one or two I have met.

[@sabueso344]

No he really wasnt, he was basically called producer cause his money was used to help fund the project but otherwise he had nothing to do with hiring or any of the actual production...he may have been allowed to change a few of his lines but again otherwise nothing was under his control, he was an actor being an actor and doing what he was directed to do.

[@Diamantlos22]

I’m sorry Scott but when I hear that people let their guards down with dummies, or that a gun loaded with dummies is basically a toy, or armorers won’t call guns “weapons” because nobody is going to be hurt, all I hear is an industry that has gotten complacent. No other line of work that uses firearms professionally allows for the person using the gun to be so hands-off in terms of safety. Touting 2 deaths in 31 years as a good track record is insane for an industry that should literally never be handling deadly ammunition. This most recent death could have been prevented by just one more extremely reasonable line of defense. Props to the armorers out there who do maintain such a safe set that actors can behave as if real guns are toys, but just because that didn’t lead to deaths before doesn’t mean it’s a safe way of operating. Clearly.

[@lllllREDACTEDlllll]

Military Drill Teams. You Lose.

[@Diamantlos22]

@@lllllREDACTEDlllll you’re going to have to be a lot more detailed if you want to make a compelling argument.

[@lllllREDACTEDlllll]

@@Diamantlos22 Google. I win.

[@zulronden7328]

the thing i find fun about all of this is actor are held to different standards i dont care where their head space is at if i had a friend hand me a gun and say their blanks or dummy round in it then i go and point it at my other friend pull the trigger because in my head it would be funny to scare the h3ll out them and it fires a live round im going to prison and if i told the cops my friend told me it had blanks in it they would laugh in my face and say well maybe you should have check the gun first and isnt possession 9/10th of the law if a friend give you what they say is rock candy and a cop pulls you over and it turns out to be meth guess whos going to prison you or your friend Alec Baldwin should be in prison he's an adult and should have known to check the gun himself first NO if and or buts

[@Vidar93]

People always forgot where protocols and rules come from. Just like with OSHA rules they are written in blood. It sounds over dramatic but its true. I won't pretend that I have always followed them to the letter but when I have broken them I know that im taking a risk on my own saftey. Where I won't ever risk something is when it involves other people and using guns will always potentially involve others. The rules or in this case gun protocol can seem like a waste of time, as cumbersome or a silly but if you follow those rules everyone stays safe and goes home to their families.. The thing I always ask people is, is skipping the extra 30 seconds that a protocol like this takes worth risking your life or limb. Its the same on jobsites, I always tell people when changing a saw blade or router bit or things like that always unplug it or take the battery out. Its a few seconds to do but you know there is no chance of it mangling your hand. Some tools have built in protections but again do you want to trust your hands to a saftey mechanism or would you rather know there is 0 chance of it harming you? Its also just good to practice it where you do it instinctively.

[@RichyJMovies]

when you got rust go for breat crust lol

[@igorfilin8342]

Wot?

[@WDC_OSA]

Excellent pun

[@TheEuphoricism]

apologies but these introductions are godawful

[@amancalledkev]

The person for whom the buck stops at was the ‘Armourer’ …. And in this case that was a young woman ….. and to be honest, one look at her and there’s NO WAY that I would’ve trusted her by her appearance alone. Sorry if that sounds sexist, but on a film set, you get a feeling for people by the way they hold and conduct themselves, as well as their appearance. That girl shouldn’t have been on that set in any role other than a Production Assistant…. But then, didn’t ‘daddy’ get her on the project? Having worked with armourers, they’re usually cut from a particular kind of cloth… she wasn’t.

[@SupremeShuckle]

A lot of people don’t know how Alec’s gun actually killed that person. When you use a revolver for a front on shot like they were at some point you have to use real fake bullets. You can’t use blanks or you’d see the crimped tip. What they did wrong was not remove the bullet primer after removing the gunpowder. Then when he fired, the primer lodged the projectile in the barrel. Then when they switched back to blanks for another shot the blank dislodged the projectile

[@SupremeShuckle]

They should have noticed the bullet missing when removing the case from the cylinder to use blanks though. That was stupid of them to not see

[@artvandelay1720]

>What they did wrong was not remove the bullet primer after removing the gunpowder. From the evidence in the trial, it seems like the armorer loaded it with unmodified live ammunition. The armorer didn't manufacture dummy rounds. She ordered them from a few sources.

[@Corvid]

One of the reasons a lot of people don't know, is because of inaccurate information/stories being posted and reposted/told and retold, as you've just demonstrated. While I'm trying to not to be a dick about details, the exact details surrounding the chain of failures that led to every firearm screen death are absolutely critical in understanding the cause. The exact sequence of events you described (a squib load, followed by a blank round ejecting the squib load with lethal velocity) is the 1993 death of Brandon Lee on the film set of The Crow. On the set of Rust, live ammunition was on set, and was loaded into a fully functioning revolver.

[@carrollsanders9376]

@@SupremeShuckle It was a live Rifle round containing Either Bullseye or Winchester 231 double based powder it was no blank it was a live round six other live rounds were found on set.

[@Riceball01]

What they did wrong was to violate all of the procedures that Hollywood has set up to ensure that something like this never happens. They never should have been allowed to use the revolver to go plinking with, the armorer should have had it locked up tight when it wasn't being used. Then they didn't have the armorer on set when this tragedy happened, another violation of protocol. And then there was Baldwin (apparently) doing more with the gun than he really should have for what was just a camera/lighting setup, not to mention that unless they were rolling for a real take, there was no need for any ammo (blank or dummy) to be loaded into the revolver at all.

[@mattbopp3977]

Not impressed. No outcome. Just noise.

[@spacetoast7783]

What kind of outcome did you expect from this?

[@LaserSplatter]

It's like you rated your own comment.

[@ebenezerwheezer2957]

0:21 ​​​@@spacetoast7783 Mattbopp was hoping they would come down on Alec Baldwin for not checking the gun. I don't care how you were raised in what your daddy and grandpappy taught you about guns. When you're on a movie set with an armorer you never open a gun and check it EVER. That just opens up the possibility that the actor could slip in a live round. But it does get the armor off the hook.

[@acex222]

@@ebenezerwheezer2957 the Baldwin hate is pathetic. He's just an actor - he never thinks about us, let's try not to seethe about him.