Morrissey said if new testing of the gun showed it was working, she would recharge Baldwin.

  • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    65
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Worse: they are saying that he, rather than the weapons handler, is somehow responsible as if he should know more than an expert.

    A bus driver who drives a bus trusting the mechanics kept the brakes in working order and runs over someone doesn’t get to blame the mechanics. They’re supposed to pretrip the bus and check that it’s in working order.

    A maintenance tech doesn’t get to blame the the operator when the operator tells them an industrial machine has been de-energized after opening it up and getting their partner fried. They’re supposed to verify the system is in fact de-energized.

    You shoving a friend out an airplane hatch without a parachute because your sky diving instructor said it was safe…. You don’t get to blame the sky diving instructor.

    You don’t get to hold a firearm and blame the person that handed it to you when you fail extremely basic gun safety. Criminal law doesn’t account for job descriptions.

    If you pick a firearm, you have a duty of care to handle it in a safe manner, Baldwin didn’t. Further, even if the armrorer said it was safe he should have had prior experience handling fire arms screaming “nuhuh”.

    It’s pretty blatantly self evident that Baldwin failed duty of care - evidence exhibit a: the dead body he put in the morgue.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is literally the opposite of true. We have actually real world cases where airplane engineers fuck up and cause the plane to crash and they are found to be at fault, not the pilots.

      Now go back ro truth social you fucking loser.

    • joel_feila@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok question, how would alec check?

      Gubs on a set can very very realistic looking gun shaped objects, same bullets, blanks, dummy rounds, non functional bulleted shaped objects. This is why on movie sets you have firearm experts.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The simplest and surest way is to use a clearing station. basically, they’re steel containers with… stuff… inside that the bullet slows and is caught. I’ve never been to a gun range anywhere that didn’t have one… and that model in the link is meant to be portable. For a revolver, you just dry-fire through the cylinder, and maybe an extra time or two to be sure. any live rounds would go off, and somebody would get bitched at, maybe fired… but nobody would be dead. That is, if Baldwin was running a safe set.

        Baring that, Colt .45 SAA’s are pretty easy to check. You open the loading gate, see the cartridges, so you pull them out and check the cartridges. if you want to check the entire cylinder, the process is fairly simple, and you can see that briefly in this video (which is demonstrating how to carry an antique single action revolver safely. this was the historic method of carry, by the way. And you can see why at the end of video.)

        Generally, props are all marked in a variety of ways that indicate- and obviously so, even if it’s not obvious to the camera- that they’re distinct from real. Cartridges for example are loaded with BB’s so they rattle (and frequently will have holes drilled in the side, and used primers so there’s a giant divot,) non-firing prop guns come in a large variety of differing levels of functionality, and are usually pretty obvious when you’re actively holding it.

        • joel_feila@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          And what is better, training everyone on set to tell the differences between all these kinds if bulletes and guns or have a small number of people?

          Also which one of those things was not done? The armorer is supposed to check the gun and make sure only the proper type of round is loaded.

    • Case@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t get how casual people are with machines designed solely to kill. It may be perfectly a cut and dry case of self defense, but it was designed to kill.

      That being said, I am pro 2a generally, though I wish proper handling of firearms was taught at different age levels in school. From elementary where, just no, to high school. Additionally, a better system to screen for mental health issues (of which I might not be able to own a firearm) but that would rely on the US having any sort of infrastructure for mental health care.

      My insurance is so shit I could go to a practitioner down the road and pay less, with no insurance taken at all. That’s just for mental health.

      I like the place I’m at, but the shitty insurance really has me looking.

      Of course there is a whole other dialogue on how the US has fallen behind most of the civilized world in medical care, under a variety of parameters - part of that being insurance is tied to your employer. I can accept it or look elsewhere for work.

      • Rusticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Interesting that you are pro 2a yet recognize that US healthcare has fallen behind the rest of the civilized world. You probably don’t realize these are related.