Prop Gun Kills Cinematographer

[Peter C.]

From what I read Baldwin isn't at fault. If you're practicing the scene why wouldn't you complete the act by pulling the trigger? I would only assign partial blame if he was also in charge of production and tolerated gross negligence on set.

It seems straight forward that armory guy was at fault. The most likely scenario I see is whoever acquired the gun never checked the chamber and passed on the erroneous unloaded status and each person in the chain of custody never verified it was true.

Like I said before outside of movie sets, usually the only person who handles a gun is the owner who is trained and certified to safely handle it.

 

[DLD]

Or not have anybody actually standing in front of said gun would be a good start as well.

That's right. On the gun fire sequences, one would need a special mini-set where the camera is operated via a remote control - or, since it's digital anyway, just leave the camera running and get out of the way - with a thick bullet-proof/resistant chunk of glass in front of it.

The gun handling procedures would also have to be followed - a required check of the weapon and the ammo, followed up by a professional prop master examining its contents, placing it into a locked case and only opening it for the actor after giving him the precise set of instructions. The actors and directors would also have to read the firearm precaution warning and sign it before the actual deployment of the weapon.

And it wouldn't hurt those present on the set during a gun fire sequence to wear some sort of personal protection - from vests to helmets.

 

[Tom Roper]

The guy feels bad enough without people like you accusing him.

His feelings are not my concern. Justice for Hutchin's is.

Yes if the crew, director and cinematographer all tell the actor its safe they are going to believe its safe.

Okay, you think it was a good decision. Well it was a deadly decision, and a person is dead because of it. Anyone who knows anything about firearms knows you always assume it is loaded. The recklessness of taking anyone else's word for it are among the most famous of last words. You can try to spin any way you want and see if any excuse you make brings Hutchin's back.

I'm not entirely sure why you are so quick to blame Alec Baldwin here. What has he done to you?

The gun was under his control, he had the last clear chance to prevent the accident.

Search Jeff Cooper - The 4 rules of gun safety

 

[Jim Feeley]

As you may know, ICG started a GoFundMe campaign "to help raise funds for her family at this difficult time." She's survived by her husband and nine-year-old son. I made a donation.

Here's the page:
https://www.gofundme.com/f/raise-funds-in-memory-of-halyna-hutchins

And yes, it really was created by the International Cinematographers Guild. You can find the link in their homepage's rotating banner:
https://www.icg600.com

 

[Bassman2003]

I can only fault Alec Baldwin for running a production that already had a perceived gun safety issue and not sorting that out before proceeding. I can not fault him as an actor, doing his job and carrying forward with the scene as directed. Tom, you keep using the word "decision". I don't see it as a decision but part of the normal course of duty as the actor in the scene. The real problem is that a REAL round of ammunition found its way into a movie set gun. That is a possible criminal act and should be the focus of the ire instead of blaming the actor like they are the only one responsible. Just my opinion and does not diminish the horrible tragedy for all affected.

Maybe a new approach needs to be had on set? Maybe new special "set guns" need to be made which do not have barrels but are like cap guns but also create a muzzle flash artificially. Then audio can be added in post. I see no need for real guns to be anywhere near a film production.

 

[ozmorphasis]

His feelings are not my concern. Justice for Hutchin's is.



Okay, you think it was a good decision. Well it was a deadly decision, and a person is dead because of it. Anyone who knows anything about firearms knows you always assume it is loaded. The recklessness of taking anyone else's word for it are among the most famous of last words. You can try to spin any way you want and see if any excuse you make brings Hutchin's back.



The gun was under his control, he had the last clear chance to prevent the accident.

Search Jeff Cooper - The 4 rules of gun safety

Tom, the logical conclusion from everything you've said here is that you think it is self-evident and obvious that all actors in films that involve guns should visually/physically examine the chamber to make sure the gun is not loaded before following the instructions and assurances of the rest of the crew to go ahead and use said gun, because the actor is the last person in the chain of people handling the weapon and finally pulling the trigger. Is that right?

I'm trying to follow your thinking here and then ask the basic question: Is that what others do on set? Is that even allowed? Are actors able to open and close the chambers of guns once it is handed to them and they are given the green light to pull the trigger in the scene. Or would that be construed as getting too involved/messing with the process of handling the prop? I sincerely don't know, but since you are invoking gun 101 thinking in a scenario that is not typical gun scenario, I'm trying to follow your thoughts here. You are leaving a bunch of things out of your explanations and keep repeating that a person is dead because an actor pulled the trigger and that none of this discussion will bring her back. Yes, but the devil is in the details. Are you saying that protocols need to change so that the actor ALWAYS makes sure the chamber is empty before using the prop, or are you saying that the protocols are fine and that the actor did not follow them?

I honestly just don't understand what you are advocating for here, other than the obvious thing: prevent killing someone. I think we all agree on that part though. The question is, how should that be prevented as a matter of protocol and was that mishandled here, and if so, who did the mishandling? Automatically the last person in the chain, because they pull the trigger?

 

[High1ander]

I agree. We live in a age where people just want instant gratification of information without any concern if all the details are there yet. I would rather get the full accurate story in a few weeks vs inaccurate and misleading information every hour from leaks. This is an ongoing investigation and unless a statement comes directly from the police department anything any "crew member" or friend of a friend of a friend of a guy that once delivered mail to the set gives as information should be ignored and not reported on.

This is how people form opinions about topics before they learn the real truth.

An accident happened and its horrible. Can we now just let the investigation take place and wait for an official explanation? This needing to be the first to break details of a story is disgusting. There was a time when that was important but so was verifying sources and making sure the information was kosher. Today we live in a throw it all out there and let people sort it out later. If they believe the theory enough they will keep paying attention for ratings.

You can wait all you want for an investigation, and then legal aftermath which will take years for you to comment (all the while we should just accept more accidents like this). In the meantime it might be good to have **** like this not happening again and simply do some deductive reasoning with available information that hasn't been refuted.

- Prior prop-gun failure of protocol.

- Union crew leaving because of safety concerns and working conditions.

Those two points alone gives us a clue about what kind of working environment and culture that permeated the set, and neither are something you can't just brush off.

Really, are you to tell me that a seasoned actor, with plenty of money and critical acclaim, that also serves as a producer on the show have no impact on the environment on set? If by comparison poor people can walk off the set that struggle for work because they know it is bad deal, but the a-list actor/producer can't man up and demand better and safer conditions? Literally, where should the buck stop? How many prop-gun mistakes do you need on set before it is time to call it a day? Well, if you ask Baldwin only time to stop is after someone is dead, the proof is in the pudding.

Like how many other productions have you heard about failed prop-guns and union-crew leaving the set?

It is just in the case of Baldwin there isn't a way to say where the actor and the producer start or stop. If you are part of the crew on set and talk to him, how do you know in what capacity he answers. If you tell him to be extra careful with the gun, will he say "I've used props for 40 years", or is it "I'm the producer and no, we don't need three guys checking the gun, In my 40 years I have never had a problem so two is fine". Maybe he said "Damn, I was scared, we had that misfire a couple of days ago, but we really changed to a pro prop-master now and doing way more than protocol stipulates".

Another aspect is that "safety" isn't just one persons job, there are check and balances. Just because you hire a prop-master or stunt driver doesn't make it safe, you need to also check if they show up drunk, distracted, etc... and if you feel something isn't right hopefully you have the courage to stand up. It is a copout if you just blame it on an incompetent co-worker that didn't check the gun, if you know that co-worker is crap at their job.


Had it been a rookie actor that hasn't done "proper productions" that did the accidental shooting I would have nothing bad to say about them.

 

[icarusfilm]

Maybe create prop guns with “odd” calibers fir which no live rounds are produced.

 

[Thomas Smet]

His feelings are not my concern. Justice for Hutchin's is.



Okay, you think it was a good decision. Well it was a deadly decision, and a person is dead because of it. Anyone who knows anything about firearms knows you always assume it is loaded. The recklessness of taking anyone else's word for it are among the most famous of last words. You can try to spin any way you want and see if any excuse you make brings Hutchin's back.



The gun was under his control, he had the last clear chance to prevent the accident.

Search Jeff Cooper - The 4 rules of gun safety

Everyone is sad that she is dead. Lets not forget the director was shot as well and that Alec and the entire cast and crew need to live with this horror for the rest of their lives.

Looking for a scapegoat is not going to help the situation however. There is no easy answer here.

It sucks, real guns should not be used on set and this could have been prevented.

You seem to ignore the jobs and roles of the crew to make those props ready to use. It has never been or ever will be the responsibility for an actor to walk on set and check the gun if its loaded with a real round. How would they even check? One cannot just observe if a round is stuck in the chamber without firing it. Its the job of the crew to get everything ready and make sure each shot is done safely.

The crew royally screwed up here. I get you may be biased as a crew member but thats a cold hard fact. Somebody that has a job to make sure the gun is safe did not do that job. The cinematographer and director believed that gun was safe as well and stood there in front of it thinking they were safe.

You ignored my statement about if your breaks fail on your car. Sometimes the negligence of others puts us in situations where others get harmed. If you want to say Alex is responsible for being a producer on the show and maybe cutting budget and safety on set thats fine but he is absolutely not to blame for not checking the gun. Especially if the crew gave the ok that it was safe and every person including those shot also thought it was safe.

I just don't think you fully grasp the chain of command or task responsibility on a set like this. No actor is ever responsible for the actions or props used on set. In fact the cinematographer very likely told him to go ahead and proceed as instructed. They all cut corners perhaps including those that were shot since they seemed to be ok with the corner cutting.

 

[Thomas Smet]

You can wait all you want for an investigation, and then legal aftermath which will take years for you to comment (all the while we should just accept more accidents like this). In the meantime it might be good to have **** like this not happening again and simply do some deductive reasoning with available information that hasn't been refuted.

- Prior prop-gun failure of protocol.

- Union crew leaving because of safety concerns and working conditions.

Those two points alone gives us a clue about what kind of working environment and culture that permeated the set, and neither are something you can't just brush off.

Really, are you to tell me that a seasoned actor, with plenty of money and critical acclaim, that also serves as a producer on the show have no impact on the environment on set? If by comparison poor people can walk off the set that struggle for work because they know it is bad deal, but the a-list actor/producer can't man up and demand better and safer conditions? Literally, where should the buck stop? How many prop-gun mistakes do you need on set before it is time to call it a day? Well, if you ask Baldwin only time to stop is after someone is dead, the proof is in the pudding.

Like how many other productions have you heard about failed prop-guns and union-crew leaving the set?

It is just in the case of Baldwin there isn't a way to say where the actor and the producer start or stop. If you are part of the crew on set and talk to him, how do you know in what capacity he answers. If you tell him to be extra careful with the gun, will he say "I've used props for 40 years", or is it "I'm the producer and no, we don't need three guys checking the gun, In my 40 years I have never had a problem so two is fine". Maybe he said "Damn, I was scared, we had that misfire a couple of days ago, but we really changed to a pro prop-master now and doing way more than protocol stipulates".

Another aspect is that "safety" isn't just one persons job, there are check and balances. Just because you hire a prop-master or stunt driver doesn't make it safe, you need to also check if they show up drunk, distracted, etc... and if you feel something isn't right hopefully you have the courage to stand up. It is a copout if you just blame it on an incompetent co-worker that didn't check the gun, if you know that co-worker is crap at their job.


Had it been a rookie actor that hasn't done "proper productions" that did the accidental shooting I would have nothing bad to say about them.

Of course something should be done about it now. The details of what happened have little to do with that. Its the tragic event that should cause the change we need. Not the tiny details that keep changing. Clearly someone f'ed up really badly and we need to make sure this doesn't happen ever again.

What I'm saying is to not pass judgement before we all know the full story and all the facts. Nothing good ever comes from a angry mob.

Change is starting to happen. The Boys will be using VFX muzzle flashes going forward. Other productions should consider the same.

 

[Run&Gun]

If anything perhaps the director and cinematographer should not have been standing right in front of the gun. Alex's job was to get the shot to look right on camera. The director and cinematographer did not need to stand right in front of the gun. They could have used a monitor off to the side for safety reasons just in case. There was really no alternative way for Alec for practice the shot.

Yes he should be careful not to pull the trigger but triggers can be easy to pull and this is why kids playing with guns sometimes shoot themselves or others. I'm sure he took great care in never pulling the trigger but if the shot was an extreme closeup of his hand and gun pointing at the camera there is only so many places for him to stick his finger and not make it look stupid. The entire point of him practicing was to pull off a realistic action. The entire point is that the gun should have been safe and we wouldn't even be having this conversation right now. I'm sure actors accidentally bump or pull the trigger all the time on prop guns or blanks. Especially if they are trying to pull off a complex physical movement like a cross draw.

Damn dude. That sounds almost like the same logic that people use when they blame a rape victim, because they wore a short skirt or they shouldn't have been "there".

 

[Run&Gun]

Thats a very simple take on the situation without knowing all the facts. Do you always use that level of harsh judgement for everyone?

The entire crew told him it was cold. The director and cinematographer stood right in front of the gun. He didn't point it at her. He pointed it exactly where he was instructed to point it. He had a job to do and was instructed by her and the director to do exactly what he did. They were likely standing there to make sure the shot was dramatic and realistic.

Stop trying to blame the actor for a horrible unfortunate accident. I hope someday someone doesn't blame you the same way for something that may be 100% out of your control.

So, the AD is the entire crew, now?

 

[Eric Coughlin]

AD stands for all departments.

 

[Thomas Smet]

Damn dude. That sounds almost like the same logic that people use when they blame a rape victim, because they wore a short skirt or they shouldn't have been "there".

Come on now. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying every person on the set thought it was safe which is why they were standing there. I'm saying maybe one of the safety precautions should be any crew not standing where the gun will be fired. Even if that makes gettign the shot more difficult by viewing the camera feed remotely.

We are trying to find ways that maybe it could have been safer.

 

[Imamacuser]

Yes he should be careful not to pull the trigger but triggers can be easy to pull and this is why kids playing with guns sometimes shoot themselves or others. I'm sure he took great care in never pulling the trigger but if the shot was an extreme closeup of his hand and gun pointing at the camera there is only so many places for him to stick his finger and not make it look stupid. The entire point of him practicing was to pull off a realistic action. The entire point is that the gun should have been safe and we wouldn't even be having this conversation right now. I'm sure actors accidentally bump or pull the trigger all the time on prop guns or blanks. Especially if they are trying to pull off a complex physical movement like a cross draw.

Any gun safety course will tell you to confirm that the gun is safe, not take someone's word for it. Actors handling functional firearms should take a safety course prior to principle photography, that way they would be competent enough to check a firearm to confirm that it's safe.

Single action revolvers have a lighter trigger pull than sami-auto hand guns and double action revolver, which have a long trigger pull that is upwards of 6 lbs.

PSA on terminology, since not all journalists and posters are familiar with firearms.

Semi-auto guns take magazines, not clips.

Magazines or cylinders are loaded with rounds, consisting of a cartridge case, primer, powder, and bullet.

 

[Mitch Gross]

There's a lot of armchair quarterbacking in this thread, some from people that appear not to know film set protocols for the handling of firearms, some from people who don't sound like they're ever been on a large production set at all and some from people who appear to have little understanding of the various laws and liability at play. What pretty much all of the posters have is a limited window of knowledge as to what actually occurred on set on Thursday. There's a lot of talkin' outta butts here.

Like Charles I've heard directly from some of the people present. I'm not going to publish information that has not already been done so through proper channels. I suggest people look at police report info from reliable publications, but even that is incomplete as of now. I believe I know what occurred and where blame likely lies, but I don't have all the info and I am neither a lawyer or a judge. And neither are you.

 

[High1ander]

Of course something should be done about it now. The details of what happened have little to do with that. Its the tragic event that should cause the change we need. Not the tiny details that keep changing. Clearly someone f'ed up really badly and we need to make sure this doesn't happen ever again.

What I'm saying is to not pass judgement before we all know the full story and all the facts. Nothing good ever comes from a angry mob.

Change is starting to happen. The Boys will be using VFX muzzle flashes going forward. Other productions should consider the same.

I'm all for not starting an angry mob so to speak before all the facts are in, however in this case there is enough evidence at this point simply point out that the producers of the movie have failed before the accident and with deadly consequence after the accident. Creating laws and standard practices that you simply can skip by going to a state that doesn't enforce them or a crew of non-union won't solve anything. If the mindset of the producers is, "we gotta cut corners to get the shots we want", and the corners being cut are safety ones... This is America we are talking about, gun-safety and control doesn't even work in schools. It won't help having laws for IATSE and California if greedy producers will just do the dirty work elsewhere, i.e. the change has to come from people standing up and refusing to work in unsafe conditions or let OHSA intervene on productions that don't follow the rules. To clarify, I would like to see nationwide laws for filming safety, I just don't think it will come to pass.

To pin this failure on "Hollywood" is just wrong because it happened outside "Hollywood-jurisdiction" and probably is gonna be a school-book example of what happens when you make things too cheap and with weak management at the top. If anything this just shows that the "Hollywood's" system has worked since Brandon's death.

Also, I'm not so sure banning all the guns is the way to go, more people have died on set the last 20 years from stunt accidents, yet we still have car chases, people falling from buildings, etc...

 

[Tom Roper]

Tom, the logical conclusion from everything you've said here is that you think it is self-evident and obvious that all actors in films that involve guns should visually/physically examine the chamber to make sure the gun is not loaded before following the instructions and assurances of the rest of the crew to go ahead and use said gun, because the actor is the last person in the chain of people handling the weapon and finally pulling the trigger. Is that right?

No, if you want to conclude something about me then this; I'm saying there is responsibility for ANYONE, not just actors, not just film crews but ANYONE handling REAL firearms under ANY circumstances to treat EVERY firearm as if it is loaded and ready to fire, and to have the muzzle pointed in a safe direction. As well as the other 3 primary safety rules, there are 7 others including one about being sure the barrel is clear of obstructions which has already been mentioned by others here in the speculation. If that handling of firearms involves passing among people, then yes the one in possession is responsible. This really should be obvious, in an accidental shooting no one gets charged criminally except the person who discharged the gun. If this is not possible to manage safely, real guns should not be used. What are we doing calling real guns props? Is that industry term used to make actors and crew feel safer around them on the set? If so, that's a systemic problem.

I'm trying to follow your thinking here and then ask the basic question: You are leaving a bunch of things out of your explanations and keep repeating that a person is dead because an actor pulled the trigger and that none of this discussion will bring her back. Yes, but the devil is in the details. Are you saying that protocols need to change so that the actor ALWAYS makes sure the chamber is empty before using the prop, or are you saying that the protocols are fine and that the actor did not follow them?

I don't believe it is appropriate to call a real gun a "prop." But I'll phrase it in a question. When the AD yelled "Cold Gun," how much trouble do you think it would have been to the A-list actor with 40 years in the action films industry, knowing that the gun in his holster was a REAL, WORKING, FIREARM; how much trouble to have yelled, "okay AD but I'm going to check anyway to be safe." Upon finding it loaded, he could have screamed out, "In all my years I've never been handed a hot gun" in all the righteousness that would go with having prevented a serious injury. Those bells that should have been ringing in his head; the first 4 rules of gun safety, were absent or ignored, or else he is an unsafe handler of real firearms.

I honestly just don't understand what you are advocating for here, other than the obvious thing: prevent killing someone. I think we all agree on that part though. The question is, how should that be prevented as a matter of protocol and was that mishandled here, and if so, who did the mishandling? Automatically the last person in the chain, because they pull the trigger?

This is a great question. As a matter of protocol, I believe it is dangerous and deadly to have real guns on set, where actors and crew work. If you can film them safely away from people and property, then possibly, but that exception opens the door to what was happening at the ranch, target practice, plinking.

But I believe what is happening here is that people are misplacing their sympathies for the suffering of Alec Baldwin, such that they see this as an accident through no fault of anyone, no one responsible, certainly not the A-list actor seen crying after the shooting, looking for others to lay blame, the union, non-union, low pay, poor housing, poor pay, poor training, lack of safety, everyone except the shooter. This is where we diverge. I don't have sympathy for him. He is dangerous to be around with guns, deadly in this case, not owning of responsibility. So what I hope for is justice, because if you don't get it, this happens again, when EVERY shooting is PREVENTABLE.

 

[ahalpert]

There's a lot of armchair quarterbacking in this thread, some from people that appear not to know film set protocols for the handling of firearms, some from people who don't sound like they're ever been on a large production set at all and some from people who appear to have little understanding of the various laws and liability at play. What pretty much all of the posters have is a limited window of knowledge as to what actually occurred on set on Thursday. There's a lot of talkin' outta butts here.

Like Charles I've heard directly from some of the people present. I'm not going to publish information that has not already been done so through proper channels. I suggest people look at police report info from reliable publications, but even that is incomplete as of now. I believe I know what occurred and where blame likely lies, but I don't have all the info and I am neither a lawyer or a judge. And neither are you.

I think that's really well put, Mitch. I just think that there's a deep wellspring of resentment from people here, including myself, who have been forced to work in unsafe conditions in order to save money/pad profits for our overseers who didn't seem to give a rat's ass about our well-being beyond their legal liabilities. That was most especially true when I used to work on larger sets, but still occasionally true on the tiny productions I do now. I have no idea who is at fault here, but I'm angry that this DP got killed and I was upset to hear that protocols may not have been followed properly

 

[ozmorphasis]

No, if you want to conclude something about me then this; I'm saying there is responsibility for ANYONE, not just actors, not just film crews but ANYONE handling REAL firearms under ANY circumstances to treat EVERY firearm as if it is loaded and ready to fire, and to have the muzzle pointed in a safe direction. As well as the other 3 primary safety rules, there are 7 others including one about being sure the barrel is clear of obstructions which has already been mentioned by others here in the speculation. If that handling of firearms involves passing among people, then yes the one in possession is responsible. This really should be obvious, in an accidental shooting no one gets charged criminally except the person who discharged the gun. If this is not possible to manage safely, real guns should not be used. What are we doing calling real guns props? Is that industry term used to make actors and crew feel safer around them on the set? If so, that's a systemic problem.



I don't believe it is appropriate to call a real gun a "prop." But I'll phrase it in a question. When the AD yelled "Cold Gun," how much trouble do you think it would have been to the A-list actor with 40 years in the action films industry, knowing that the gun in his holster was a REAL, WORKING, FIREARM; how much trouble to have yelled, "okay AD but I'm going to check anyway to be safe." Upon finding it loaded, he could have screamed out, "In all my years I've never been handed a hot gun" in all the righteousness that would go with having prevented a serious injury. Those bells that should have been ringing in his head; the first 4 rules of gun safety, were absent or ignored, or else he is an unsafe handler of real firearms.



This is a great question. As a matter of protocol, I believe it is dangerous and deadly to have real guns on set, where actors and crew work. If you can film them safely away from people and property, then possibly, but that exception opens the door to what was happening at the ranch, target practice, plinking.

But I believe what is happening here is that people are misplacing their sympathies for the suffering of Alec Baldwin, such that they see this as an accident through no fault of anyone, no one responsible, certainly not the A-list actor seen crying after the shooting, looking for others to lay blame, the union, non-union, low pay, poor housing, poor pay, poor training, lack of safety, everyone except the shooter. This is where we diverge. I don't have sympathy for him. He is dangerous to be around with guns, deadly in this case, not owning of responsibility. So what I hope for is justice, because if you don't get it, this happens again, when EVERY shooting is PREVENTABLE.

Thanks for clarifying point by point. While I don't agree with every word of what you wrote, I at least understand where you are coming from now.