c'mon man, as anyone knows who has trained as much on firearms as you and Mr. Baldwin have; one does not 'pull' the trigger, one 'presses' the trigger. Technically, he's not wrong.
uh, I wouldn't doubt if he murdered her intentionally. What we know- He has had a lot more firearms safety and tactical training than your average person due to his roles in movies He was 'rehearsing' a scene in which he was not supposed to fire the gun at all much less at anyone (per the script manager's lawsuit) The crew was walking off the project left and right and was very vocal about the chaos behind the scenes Of interest- He is an executive producer on the movie (in other words, he was a manager and his staff was pissed at him) He has a well documented and very longstanding history with extreme anger management issues Also of interest and certainly to be considered- He has a history of womanizing and adultery. He's a mid-60s narcissistic egomaniac with rapidly dissipating good looks. By the looks of the deceased, she's about a 6.5 out of 10. Exactly the type of woman a mid-60s narcissistic egomaniac with rapidly dissipating good looks would take a run at to boost his confidence. Did he? If he did, did she spurn him? Did she accept and threaten to out him? For this to have been a 'tragic accident', we are to believe that not only did a live round somehow make it onto a movie set; it made it into a gun capable of firing live rounds (is that standard on a movie set? I don't know but I would find out), the armorer missed this, the director missed it, and Baldwin failed to check the weapon, and then broke the cardinal rule of pointing directly at a person/thing which he had no intention of destroying, then actuated the hammer, then pressed said trigger -or- there was a mechanical failure on the hammer catch. That's a minumum of 7 'tragic errors' at least 6 of which are human errors that all had to happen in succession for said 'tragedy' to occur. Very interesting to me- within mere hours of the incident, the internet was flooded with at least 3 narratives of what had happened- all of which shifted blame from and exhonerating Baldwin: The armorer was inexperienced and would take the crew out drinking and shooting. From there, a live round made it into a live gun It was a prop gun that exploded, bits of which struck the victims It was a blank that had too much powder, and a fragment struck the camera which broke and shrapnel hit both victims Social media experts have noted that those narratives, which are all separate but all exhonerate Baldwin, spread so fast and were instantly accepted or at least profligated by regular media, that they had to be coordinated. At no point has any big media outlet expressed any suspicion that Baldwin in any way did anything wrong. So you tell me, what's the most likely scenario? Ockham's razor says that the most simple answer is the most likely. He probably murdered that broad. At least, SOMEONE intentionally put a live round in that gun knowing it would at some point be fired towards someone. At the VERY least, he is guilty of negligent homicide because he didn't check the gun for live rounds and he actuated the hammer while pointing it at someone. He admitted as much in his puff piece interview with his buddy.
Come on Noods. I can't stand the guy but some of the stuff you posted is kinda farfetched chit? Kinda like Michelle Obama is a man type stuff.
Possible Motive(s). Opportunity. Means. Certainly, at the very least there was negligence - to which even he admitted.
I believe the series of events which had to have happened to classify the incident as an 'accident' is so unlikely as to strongly indicate that SOMEONE intentionally put a live round in that gun. What their motive is and what they expected to happen as a result I do not know for certain. But we do know who was holding the gun that fired the fatal shot. So start with him, then work outwards. I hope the cops took every single person's phone that would have been involved in any way with that scene and that gun.
I don't feel sorry for anybody any person when handed a fire arm from another that does not completely inspect and empty all chambers. Trust nobody believe nothing
I bought it for $600 a while ago, put nount and a scope on it, bought a few 100 rounds of ammo and damn near sold it when times were tough for $650 for everything. Luckily coworker who was interested in it told me I was a fool if I sold it to him. Absolutely no slop in the cylinder. Serial number takes it back to early 80's. Wouldn't mind getting a 7" Super Redhawk at some point.
Admittedly I have not looked into all of the ins and outs of it, but I do believe he and a few others should all be charged with negligence or possibly involuntary manslaughter or a mix of the two. Never been a big fan so nit sure what training or movies he has made that he utilizes firearms.
I thought about a S&W500. Shot my buddies. Packs a punch but man it was fun to shoot. Need a backup for my slug gun and i never was a muzzleloader guy
I really wanted a .357 mag. bit this one came up on another forum, then a couple weeks after the scope came up on same forum for $100. Figured it was meant to be. Have only taken a BB with it, want to see how it does on an adult deer on whether I keep it or not
I have taken 2 adult deer (bucks) with my Smith & Wesson model 29 with an 8 3/8" barrel chambered in .44 mag. It worked just fine. One shot each at 35 and 50 yards.
How far did they go and was there a bloodtrail? I just don't know about the expansion and transfer of shock. This is the closest to rifle we get, sans muzzle loader.
Im going to get ahead of the 8ball and buy a rifle in 350 legend. I figure if i have that all dialed in and Illinois actually follows suit and allows straight wall then ill be ready and beat the mad rush. If not then i still have a really cool rifle to kill coyotes and other critters with.
One went 50 yards and the other about 75 yards. I don't remember much about the blood trails as I saw both of them drop and was able to walk up to them.
