Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 12:51:30 GMT
Those who do not handle guns don't understand that basic gun safety rules exist, regardless of the situation. Those that do handle weapons and know gun safety rules understand that putting them in practice each time a weapon is handled is what prevents accidents, regardless of the situation. This type of safety situation is pretty black and white because gun safety rules are very basic and the frustration exists on both sides - basic gun safety practices prevents injury and death. Follow those rules and prevent bad things from happening. Maybe because the world has been operating in state of grey for so long it's hard to switch the perspective? I don't know, but yes, it is very frustrating. It is very frustrating that suggesting basic gun safety rules need to be followed by anyone handling a weapon is being accused of being in "judgement" and "audacious". In my experience of reading reports of gun use that had led to injury or death it is more likely to be a person that is constantly around guns that are the more complacent and careless, in comparison to people that are not used to them, who treat them with caution and also respect the fact they have a lethal weapon. You need to separate a situation in real life with the fictional recreation of a movie. Not only does this safety cover movies it also covers television. Do you seriously expect every actor which includes children to inspect a weapon for safety knowing full well that there is a professional expert on set whose job it s to do this? Seriously? I find is strange that you purposely registered on the board purely to discuss gun safety on movies. Or are you already registered here under another name? "You need to separate a situation in real life with the fictional recreation of a movie" >>> This is the first issue. This kind of thinking is what gets people into trouble with guns - this it is someone else's responsibility. "I find is strange that you purposely registered on the board purely to discuss gun safety on movies." >>> I did not register for that reason. This was a subject that came up that I joined. Is that not allowed for old/new members? Considering you live in a country that severely restricts gun ownership by most citizens, how can a person hold your comments with much weight? Not much. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 12:53:13 GMT
The dramatics don't help. No one called your daughter ignorant except you.
Let's flip the table. If your daughter had been the one killed on set who would you be holding responsible? The armorer or the person who pulled the trigger?
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Oct 29, 2021 13:16:48 GMT
The dramatics don't help. No one called your daughter ignorant except you.Let's flip the table. If your daughter had been the one killed on set who would you be holding responsible? The armorer or the person who pulled the trigger?
1. My daughter very much is ignorant. I’ve explained that twice and clearly. And she would wholeheartedly agree. Semantic accuracy is neither dramatics nor hyperbole. And yes, it is always helpful in a debate. 2. I would blame the armorer for my daughter’s gun death if he was derelict. As would my husband (I just checked). Considering I’ve been advocating for specialists-and-not actors, this should not be a surprising stance. - - - - - 3. Speaking of considering: Your above “Considering you live in a country that severely restricts gun ownership by most citizens, how can a person hold your comments with much weight? Not much.” is highly insulting and emblematic of an argument I’ve noticed before this thread and in it by some - that non-gun owners shouldn’t have opinions about guns because they don’t handle them, don’t know the rules, haven’t had the training, don’t have the reverence, don’t belong to the special club, whatever. It always strikes me as arrogant and an attempt to exclude anybody but a gun supporter from decisions - or, like here, even discussion - concerning one of our biggest problems. Therefore, finis. Rock on. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 13:43:38 GMT
In my experience of reading reports of gun use that had led to injury or death it is more likely to be a person that is constantly around guns that are the more complacent and careless, in comparison to people that are not used to them, who treat them with caution and also respect the fact they have a lethal weapon. You need to separate a situation in real life with the fictional recreation of a movie. Not only does this safety cover movies it also covers television. Do you seriously expect every actor which includes children to inspect a weapon for safety knowing full well that there is a professional expert on set whose job it s to do this? Seriously? I find is strange that you purposely registered on the board purely to discuss gun safety on movies. Or are you already registered here under another name? "You need to separate a situation in real life with the fictional recreation of a movie" >>> This is the first issue. This kind of thinking is what gets people into trouble with guns - this it is someone else's responsibility. "I find is strange that you purposely registered on the board purely to discuss gun safety on movies." >>> I did not register for that reason. This was a subject that came up that I joined. Is that not allowed for old/new members? Considering you live in a country that severely restricts gun ownership by most citizens, how can a person hold your comments with much weight? Not much.Because realistically that has nothing to do with the safety of "props" on movie sets or on television sets. The expectation of the professional " experts" on safety that have been employed within the production team would be the same whether the film or TV series was made in the US or in the UK. In this instance both the employed " experts" that were responsible on this movie set have been negligent in the execution of their duties - and neither of those are named Alec Baldwin. And for the record gun safety knowledge is not unique to the gun carrying population of the US and it is rude and condescending to suggest that because we have strict gun controls that the general public have no knowledge of how a gun should be handled here. In fact I would suggest that citizens of countries that do have strict gun controls would be far more likely to have safer standards than the casual way that some pop their handguns in their purses to run to the store in the US. We actually know how lethal a weapon a gun is - that is why we have such strict controls over who is allowed to purchase them. Ever heard of the saying -familiarity breeds contempt - exactly what the so called professional armourer and the assistant director are guilty of IMO. |
|
oh yvonne
Prolific Pea
Posts: 8,064
Jun 26, 2014 0:45:23 GMT
|
Post by oh yvonne on Oct 29, 2021 13:54:23 GMT
The dramatics don't help. No one called your daughter ignorant except you. L et's flip the table. If your daughter had been the one killed on set who would you be holding responsible? The armorer or the person who pulled the trigger?Why the armoror of course. And then I'd sue the ever living shit out of the production company who hired her/them. Blame the actor? Nope. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 14:36:47 GMT
My response was also based on the post questioning my intentions...
So yes, I got defensive at the arrogance, just like many others have on this thread.
It's a shame this new board and its members don't share the spirit of being able to respectfully debate anymore like the old 2PeasInABucket.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 15:02:26 GMT
So yes, I got defensive at the arrogance, just like many others have on this thread. It's a shame this new board and its members don't share the spirit of being able to respectfully debate anymore like the old 2PeasInABucket. There is nothing arrogant about asking a simple question at a coincidence that you seem to be such a recent member of the board and with the exception of one post this is the only thread you have participated in. Many of us have respectfully debated the issues surrounding this tragedy and it was you that started throwing personal insults about, no one else. |
|
|
|
Post by gar on Oct 29, 2021 15:07:32 GMT
It's a shame this new board and its members don't share the spirit of being able to respectfully debate anymore like the old 2PeasInABucket. So just out of curiosity, what was your old Pea name? |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 17:26:06 GMT
@dottyscrapper, I never called you a derogatory name. I just said I cannot put a lot of weight behind a person's view about guns who lives in a country whose laws are very restrictive toward the majority of people where gun ownership is concerned. If that is considered insulting, condescending, arrogant, etc. then I will say I'm sorry your feelings were hurt. But those on the opposing side are showing the same traits with during this argument, especially against a person they do not agree with. I was hesitant to rejoin this particular group after lurking for a looooong time due to the persistent pile-ons I see for those with opposing views. I don't know if I want to be part of a community who is not open to diverse opinions on subjects. @gar, I can't even remember what my old forum name was at the old 2Peas. That was over 10 years ago and I don't keep the a consistent forum name across social media sites. I still remember the time one pea tracked down users via their IP addresses or something of the sort? That was nuts and quite freakish. Overall, the thing that really mortifies me on this subject and in the discussion (as someone who does handle firearms, practices with then, and who has been trained/reminded on their safe handling every year) is that it comes across from those who do not handle firearms that gun safety inside a movie set is different than gun safety outside a movie set. In both settings a person handles a firearm. In both settings a person has a responsibility to everyone around them that they can safely handle the weapon. Yes, I understand movie sets have armorers and a series of checks to prevent accidents. Just because a person is an actor, it does not exempt them from understanding and practicing safe gun handling. No one has given me a GOOD reason why movie stars get to hand over their responsibilities for safe handling of a firearm to another person. Other actors (some, not all) check the guns they use before filming a scene and handle their guns (regardless of type) by following basic gun safety rules. I am trying to understand why people in this thread believe Alec Baldwin is exempt from having personal responsibility and I guess I am having a really, really, really hard time accepting that "it was the armorer's job" or "it was the producers job". Before anyone is on a movie set they are people in a collective group working together on a project. Being a person in a collective group (like a movie set) means watching out and taking care of each other. Watching out and taking care of each other takes precedence; it is the #1 priority. Being an armorer, producer, or actor comes second. I will go to into the ground believing that if Alec Baldwin had received minimal training on the firearm he was handling, the different types of ammunition, and had he checked the gun when it was handed to him, the accident would have been completely prevented by Alec himself. To copy AmeliaBloomer - Therefore, finis. |
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Oct 29, 2021 17:37:56 GMT
@dottyscrapper , I never called you a derogatory name. I just said I cannot put a lot of weight behind a person's view about guns who lives in a country whose laws are very restrictive toward the majority of people where gun ownership is concerned. If that is considered insulting, condescending, arrogant, etc. then I will say I'm sorry your feelings were hurt. But those on the opposing side are showing the same traits with during this argument, especially against a person they do not agree with. I was hesitant to rejoin this particular group after lurking for a looooong time due to the persistent pile-ons I see for those with opposing views. I don't know if I want to be part of a community who is not open to diverse opinions on subjects. @gar, I can't even remember what my old forum name was at the old 2Peas. That was over 10 years ago and I don't keep the a consistent forum name across social media sites. I still remember the time one pea tracked down users via their IP addresses or something of the sort? That was nuts and quite freakish. Overall, the thing that really mortifies me on this subject and in the discussion (as someone who does handle firearms, practices with then, and who has been trained/reminded on their safe handling every year) is that it comes across from those who do not handle firearms that gun safety inside a movie set is different than gun safety outside a movie set. In both settings a person handles a firearm. In both settings a person has a responsibility to everyone around them that they can safely handle the weapon. Yes, I understand movie sets have armorers and a series of checks to prevent accidents. Just because a person is an actor, it does not exempt them from understanding and practicing safe gun handling. No one has given me a GOOD reason why movie stars get to hand over their responsibilities for safe handling of a firearm to another person. Other actors (some, not all) check the guns they use before filming a scene and handle their guns (regardless of type) by following basic gun safety rules. I am trying to understand why people in this thread believe Alec Baldwin is exempt from having personal responsibility and I guess I am having a really, really, really hard time accepting that "it was the armorer's job" or "it was the producers job". Before anyone is on a movie set they are people in a collective group working together on a project. Being a person in a collective group (like a movie set) means watching out and taking care of each other. Watching out and taking care of each other takes precedence; it is the #1 priority. Being an armorer, producer, or actor comes second. I will go to into the ground believing that if Alec Baldwin had received minimal training on the firearm he was handling, the different types of ammunition, and had he checked the gun when it was handed to him, the accident would have been completely prevented by Alec himself. To copy AmeliaBloomer - Therefore, finis. Just because not everyone is agreeing with you or giving you a reason for their POV that you think is "good enough" it doesn't mean that people aren't having a discussion. Aren't you saying that you want discussion? But then when people give a different point of view, you are making demeaning comments, yet when the same happens to you, it turns into a hair flip? |
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456 
|
Post by sassyangel on Oct 29, 2021 17:44:25 GMT
@dottyscrapper, I never called you a derogatory name. I just said I cannot put a lot of weight behind a person's view about guns who lives in a country whose laws are very restrictive toward the majority of people where gun ownership is concerned. If that is considered insulting, condescending, arrogant, etc. then I will say I'm sorry your feelings were hurt. But those on the opposing side are showing the same traits with during this argument, especially against a person they do not agree with. I was hesitant to rejoin this particular group after lurking for a looooong time due to the persistent pile-ons I see for those with opposing views. I don't know if I want to be part of a community who is not open to diverse opinions on subjects. @gar, I can't even remember what my old forum name was at the old 2Peas. That was over 10 years ago and I don't keep the a consistent forum name across social media sites. I still remember the time one pea tracked down users via their IP addresses or something of the sort? That was nuts and quite freakish. Overall, the thing that really mortifies me on this subject and in the discussion (as someone who does handle firearms, practices with then, and who has been trained/reminded on their safe handling every year) is that it comes across from those who do not handle firearms that gun safety inside a movie set is different than gun safety outside a movie set. In both settings a person handles a firearm. In both settings a person has a responsibility to everyone around them that they can safely handle the weapon. Yes, I understand movie sets have armorers and a series of checks to prevent accidents. Just because a person is an actor, it does not exempt them from understanding and practicing safe gun handling. No one has given me a GOOD reason why movie stars get to hand over their responsibilities for safe handling of a firearm to another person. Other actors (some, not all) check the guns they use before filming a scene and handle their guns (regardless of type) by following basic gun safety rules. I am trying to understand why people in this thread believe Alec Baldwin is exempt from having personal responsibility and I guess I am having a really, really, really hard time accepting that "it was the armorer's job" or "it was the producers job". Before anyone is on a movie set they are people in a collective group working together on a project. Being a person in a collective group (like a movie set) means watching out and taking care of each other. Watching out and taking care of each other takes precedence; it is the #1 priority. Being an armorer, producer, or actor comes second. I will go to into the ground believing that if Alec Baldwin had received minimal training on the firearm he was handling, the different types of ammunition, and had he checked the gun when it was handed to him, the accident would have been completely prevented by Alec himself. To copy AmeliaBloomer - Therefore, finis. Someone is going to have to qualify for me exactly what constitutes a “pile on” on here. If you take a minority or controversial stance on something, does the fact more people comment to disagree with you make it a pile on? At what point should people stop commenting when it’s clear this the case, to avoid even the appearance of a pile on? |
|
|
|
Post by kokomo on Oct 29, 2021 18:02:24 GMT
Wow , just wow. Everyone can have an opinion. It doesn’t mean it’s right . None of us were on the movie set , so none of us have ALL the details yet. If you are employed you have a job. The armour’s job was to do HIS job and check the guns.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 18:19:41 GMT
I am trying to understand why people in this thread believe Alec Baldwin is exempt from having personal responsibility Are you? It seems people have given dozens of reasons. You deem their reasons irrelevant to your beliefs. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Oct 29, 2021 18:22:15 GMT
I still think the fundamental issue is that the vast majority of the time the armorer/assistant director isn't handing an actor a firearm - that's the point that is continuously brushed off as if irrelevant. For rehearsals, and even the vast majority of scenes, it is truly a prop - not a functioning firearm that is handed to the actor. And yes the making of a movie requires them to not follow safety procedures with these props - sometimes plastic guns, sometimes guns retrofitted to not fire projectiles - but they are no more a firearm than a kids toy cap gun and they absolutely will point it at someone as it is often REQUIRED in making a movie. Several professional armorers have stepped forward to talk about what this extremely inexperienced armorer did wrong, and several state that they never have weapons that can shoot projectiles on the set period - they retrofit even the firearms that fire blanks to not be able to shoot live ammunition as well for extra security - these discussions are helpful in thinking about additional safety precautions that can be taken on set as really the need to file actual bullets is not typically part of the movie making business.
A non-functional prop is what Alec Baldwin should have been handed and I'm sure had every expectation WAS handed. It was a terrible error, but as an actor in REHEARSAL when handed a prop and being told cold gun - ie one that does not have ANY ability to fire even a blank - the idea that he would treat it as a firearm is just not at all in line with the reality of movie making.
I have every expectation that functional firearms will disappear from movie sets, and really that's probably for the best, as this has clearly shown, so called experts are as likely to kill someone as anyone else.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:27:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 19:59:21 GMT
@dottyscrapper , I never called you a derogatory name. I just said I cannot put a lot of weight behind a person's view about guns who lives in a country whose laws are very restrictive toward the majority of people where gun ownership is concerned. If that is considered insulting, condescending, arrogant, etc. then I will say I'm sorry your feelings were hurt. But those on the opposing side are showing the same traits with during this argument, especially against a person they do not agree with. I was hesitant to rejoin this particular group after lurking for a looooong time due to the persistent pile-ons I see for those with opposing views. I don't know if I want to be part of a community who is not open to diverse opinions on subjects. Really? Being called arrogant is quite derogatory in my book and you also insulted me with this You have no idea who I am or what I do for a living or whether I have any experience with guns or not. I could very well be one of the 564,929 people that hold a firearm and/or a shotgun certificate in England and Wales or in fact I could be a fully trained armed policeman.. Yet, with non of this knowledge you decide that whatever comments I have on the subject of this thread you have decided it holds no weight as far as you are concerned - and you call me arrogant? |
|
Gennifer
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,241
|
Post by Gennifer on Oct 29, 2021 22:51:42 GMT
Overall, the thing that really mortifies me on this subject and in the discussion (as someone who does handle firearms, practices with then, and who has been trained/reminded on their safe handling every year) is that it comes across from those who do not handle firearms that gun safety inside a movie set is different than gun safety outside a movie set. Hi. Are you intentionally ignoring me and multiple other people in this thread? Not everyone who owns a gun thinks like you. Not everyone who disagrees is gun-ignorant. Also, imma call bullshit on not remembering your previous username. You didn’t find us by accident, and if you actively looked for us you were not just a casual participant. |
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Oct 29, 2021 23:14:21 GMT
It's a shame this new board and its members don't share the spirit of being able to respectfully debate anymore like the old 2PeasInABucket. What the heck version of the "old 2PeasInABucket" were you hanging out on?!?!?  |
|
|
|
Post by pixiechick on Oct 30, 2021 3:51:18 GMT
Didn’t Jon Erik Hexom die from a prop gun as well? He did. I was gutted. I was in primary school and had a huge crush on him. I thought he and Erik Estrada were the most beautiful men to ever walk the earth. I don't know who Jon Erik Hexom is but I had the biggest crush on Ponch when it was a kid.  |
|
|
|
Post by pixiechick on Oct 30, 2021 4:50:03 GMT
But he had no reason to have to do so. It wasn't his job to do it. On every film set there are employees. I agree. But I think that GUN safety is in a category by itself. I think those of us who handle guns safely will agree with that. You're right that it wasn't currently his job to do it. I think my point to all of this is that it should be different. The actor firing the gun should inspect it, they should be trained and that should be a part of the chain of safety. I realize it's not that way now, but I hope it can be so in the future. I second this. It may not be the protocol for on set, but I hope the good that could possibly come out of this is that either they go to weighted prop guns that don't actually do anything, or that it becomes standard procedure for anyone handling a gun on set be required to check it themselves too. Even in a gun store when you shop for a gun, when you ask to look at a gun they will check it before they hand it to the customer, and safety protocol says even though you just watched him check it not 10 seconds ago, you check it yourself when it's handed to you. If you're holding it, you're supposed to be responsible for doing everything in your power to be safe with it. It's a very weird ritualistic routine, but it saves lives. And that's what gun safety is all about, so I hope this brings about changes in on set gun safety protocol. It's awful that this happened and I'm still devastated for Alec Baldwin and everyone involved. |
|
used2scrap
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,097
|
Post by used2scrap on Oct 30, 2021 6:09:51 GMT
Wow , just wow. Everyone can have an opinion. It doesn’t mean it’s right . None of us were on the movie set , so none of us have ALL the details yet. If you are employed you have a job. The armour’s job was to do HIS job and check the guns. Her job |
|
|
|
Post by lesserknownpea on Oct 30, 2021 8:03:39 GMT
It's a shame this new board and its members don't share the spirit of being able to respectfully debate anymore like the old 2PeasInABucket. What the heck version of the "old 2PeasInABucket" were you hanging out on?!?!? Yikes! This. This board is a tea party compared to the old board. |
|
