Recent comments in /f/news

reddragon105 t1_jegp8un wrote

I think you mean armorer, which is a different role to props master, but that's who most people seem to want to blame.

But it needs to be emphasised that the armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, was hired as both armorer and props assistant, and days before the shooting a line producer had told her off for dedicating too much time to weapons safety and not enough to assisting the props master. She pushed back, complaining about the lax gun safety on set, but was overruled. So on the day of the shooting she was elsewhere, assisting the props master, as she'd been told to.

It was the AD who decided to go ahead with an unscheduled rehearsal that involved a gun without calling for the armorer. He took the weapon, declared it cold himself, and handed it to Baldwin - none of which he should have done, and he should have known that. So he's definitely negligent in that sense but obviously a bunch of things went wrong leading up to this - not least bad management. I mean who hires a part time armorer on a western?

2

reddragon105 t1_jegovp9 wrote

But not present during the scene. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed was hired as both armorer and props assistant, and days before the shooting a line producer had told her off for dedicating too much time to weapons safety and not enough to assisting the props master. She pushed back, complaining about the lax gun safety on set, but was overruled. So on the day of the shooting she was elsewhere, assisting the props master, as she'd been told to.

Then the AD decided to go ahead with an unscheduled rehearsal that involved a gun without calling for the armorer. He took the weapon, declared it cold himself, and handed it to Baldwin - none of which he should have done, and he should have known that. So he's definitely negligent in that sense but obviously a bunch of things went wrong leading up to this - not least bad management. I mean who hires a part time armorer on a western?

26

reddragon105 t1_jegobuo wrote

No, the AD didn't take the gun from the armorer - he picked it up, declared it cold himself, and handed it to Baldwin. None of which he was supposed to do in his capacity as AD. That's how he was negligent.

The armorer wasn't present at the time - she was on set somewhere, but not told they were about to use a weapon as it was an unscheduled rehearsal. The AD decided to proceed without the necessary supervision.

And the armorer wasn't even working as armorer at the time - she was hired for two jobs: armorer and props assistant, and days before the shooting a line producer had told her off for dedicating too much time to weapons safety and not enough to assisting the props master. She pushed back, complaining about the lax gun safety on set, but was overruled. So on the day of the shooting she was elsewhere, assisting the props master, as she'd been told to.

The whole thing is a clusterfuck of bad management and complacency, but at the end of the day the AD should have known better than to use a weapon in a scene that had not been checked by the professional person whose responsibility it was to check it.

31

Art-Zuron t1_jegmmxz wrote

And injuring one is the same crime as injuring a human officer.

Which tracks, since the dogs are actually about as bad at their job as humans. Barely any better than guessing randomly, ans used as a bludgeon against vulnerable groups. Barely better than "I thought I smelled weed"

I place all blame squarely on the police though, because the dogs don't know better.

3