22 October 2021

I'll Take "Four Rules" For $1,000

The clue is, "The person responsible."

Who is, "The person who pulled the trigger while pointing it at someone else?"

Alec, you don't get to dissemble and blame the props guy for what you did.

If you'd been following any of the four rules the person you killed wouldn't even be injured today.  Neither would the person you injured.

How do I know this?

Because I have a loaded, chambered gun on me right now.  And I have had for the most part of 15 years.  Not once have I shot someone in those years.

How can this be true?

Because, unlike you, I learned the rules.

Also unlike you, when I broke them, I got lucky.

I've had a negligent discharge.  I got the wall.


I was taking apart my Glock21.  Because I wasn't pointing it at anything I cared about destroying and something that could stop the round, my fucking up treating it like it was loaded and pulling the trigger didn't hurt anyone.

There's redundancy built into those rules for a reason.

But, by several reports, you pointed a gun right at the departed and pulled the trigger.  That also injured someone else standing behind them.

You broke all four rules.

It does not matter if you were handed a live, hot gun or a bar of soap carved into a gun shape.

YOU acted as if it wasn't loaded.

YOU put your finger on the trigger and pulled it.

YOU pointed the gun at something you didn't wish to destroy.

YOU didn't make sure that it was safe to point in that direction.

The property manager didn't do those things, you did.

I know you don't understand because you've been blaming the deodand for years, but it's what we've been trying to explain to you for those same years.

That gun didn't kill her.  The property master didn't kill her.  You killed her.

I honestly hope that you get what's coming to you.


  1. Acting ain't reality. Actors do all kinds of stupid things because it is in the script. And, it IS the "prop-man's" fault. I am guessing that they hired "some guy" to avoid paying scale to a trained and experienced expert. There are all types of "blank" loads designed to give muzzle flash, smoke or muzzle blast. The "prop-man" is supposed to make it safe or to suggest they add details with CGI post-production. Firearms with "blanks" are not "cap guns". The actors (talent) are just there for the camera. The "prop-man" makes it happen, safely.

    The injuries suggest that they were doing a dramatic close up that got way too real.

    1. The property master is culpable, definitely, for introducing a loaded, real gun to the set and handing it to the actor.

      But he didn't pull the trigger while pointing it at the assistant director. That's all on Alec.

      The rumor is that he wasn't doing actor-man stuff at the time, but goofing around. That's even more on Alec because the shot might have been safe if it was being filmed.

      But I'm being hard on Alec because I know what would happen to me if The Lovely Harvey handed me a gun, said, "it's not loaded," and I pulled the trigger with it pointed at Marv, killing him.

      I'd be going to jail. So should Alec.

  2. Yup. Good actors take responsibility for what they do regarding using chainsaws, knives, guns, cars, whatever.

    Final responsibility lies on the trigger puller.

    If you handed me a supposedly empty gun, and I was screwing around and shot you, it's my fault, at least negligent homicide. Because it's me who shot the gun.

    Sadly, his huge bank account and his star status will most likely allow him to not have to acknowledge responsibility and any punishment. And he will continue to be a violent ass with a bad enough history of abuse towards women.

  3. Heh, I followed a hit from the DOJ over at my place back to yours.

  4. Yep. Whole lotta shouldas but ultimately Baldwin pointed a pistol at the woman and pulled the trigger. He owns the result.

    By the way, "prop" is the shortened form of "property", that is something owned by a theater or performing company that is used in a performance. It does not mean "fake". The firearms used in Baldwin's movie were certainly not fake. There has been no explanation of why there was live ammunition in the firearm. Baldwin didn't check the firearm ammunition, pointed the firearm at the woman, and pulled the trigger. He owns the result. There might have been others who would have discovered the live rounds, but ultimately, the trigger puller is responsible for whatever happens. This was not an equipment failure.

  5. hard to film a western gunfight without pointing a gun at somebody. and actors aren't allowed to handle the props except as directed to avoid just this sort of thing. most likely scenario is the brandon lee. alec cheaped out on the armorer selection. director wanted bullets showing for the closeup. cut! yoyo just removed the powder from live rounds rather than buy dummies. hammer drops, primer go pow! bullet lodges in barrel. nobody notices. full power blanks loaded, action! bang,cut!cut! the assistant director was also acting in the movie and alec is the producer. he's going down for hiring the prop guy but prop guy gets the hit. they reportedly had several prior incidents with this guy, but were too cheap to replace him.

  6. Nope.
    Different rules.
    And I've laid them out on my blog, ad infinitum.

    Just because you put on mouse ears doesn't make your house Disneyland.
    Just because an actor gets handed a gun as part of a production doesn't make him ultimately responsible, morally or legally, for what happens after that. Motion pictures are fantasy, not reality, and there are other rules in play, of which most ordinary folks are completely unfamiliar.

    There are possible circumstances where Baldwin is morally and legally culpable.
    There are others where he is no such thing, nor ever should be. (And the likeliest, by far, IMHO.)
    Which ones were in play when this happened is entirely the open question.

    Is he an anti-gun @$$hole? Unquestionably. So don't like him.
    Four Rules? Pfft.
    Hollywood's job is to break the Four Rules, deliberately, and you pay them to do it every time you watch a movie.
    Raylan Givens didn't get six seasons of shows with great ratings by following the Four Rules, did he?

    Show me any ten blog posts anywhere condemning Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan, and/or Daniel Craig as irresponsible jackholes for pointing a gun right at the camera (and camera operators, DP, director, and everyone else) and opening fire in every James Bond opening going back forty years.
    It's never happened once in Internet history, AFAIK, nor in print before that.

    The last person you want in any position of responsibility for firearms safety is any actor. The word is synonymous with moron. They're all idiots, 24/7/365/forever, and twice on Sunday. Even Tom Selleck, Clint Eastwood, or John Wayne (who famously shot his friend Ward Bond in the face with a shotgun during a bird hunting trip IRL, FFS).

    Wait for the whole story to come out, and for now, just enjoy the fact the long after he's dead and cold, you'll justifiably be seeing "Alec Baldwin's gun has killed more people than my entire collection of them has."
    And there's nothing he can ever say to change that fact, even if it wasn't his fault.

    If it turns out it was his fault, because of actions he took that he shouldn't have, there'll be plenty of time to pile on then.

    Right now, everyone's too busy letting their dislike for a thoroughly dislikeable person who hates guns and hit women color their appraisal on his moral and/or judicial guilt or innocence in this incident, when it may very well turn out he has neither. And that's worse than a crime; it's a blunder.

    Enjoy with all dispatch and merriment the karma footlong shit sandwich he's already been handed, and wait and see about the rest.

    1. The reason you don't find condemnations of all those shows breaking the four rules is because nobody died.

      I'm actually familiar with the Post-Brandon procedures for filming with firearms.

      If those rules had been followed, nobody would have gotten hurt.

      So he broke someone's set of rules and someone died. Following the 4-rules would have kept him from hurting anyone.

      Following the elaborate procedures established after the Brandon Lee shooting would have allowed him to break the four rules safely.

      If you're not doing one, you'd better be doing the other.

      And he appears to have followed neither, so he deserves jail time. And the armorer. And the director. And the producers. Because they're all in the chain of the procedures and any one of them has the power to step in and double check the weapon at any time. The procedures require multiple checks before handing the idiot dancing monkey anything that even looks like a firearm.

    2. Yup. Agree with Angus. And the whole "muh actor's brain hurtzzz" bit might work in California, but guess what, it's New Mexico.

      Final responsibility lies on the trigger puller. Just as if any of you handed me an 'empty gun' and I pulled the trigger, killing one of you.

      Even Will Smith gets it, in the short video where somebody muzzles him and he knocks the gun away. The good Baldwin gets it. Tom Selleck gets it. Clint Eastwood gets it. Many many many many actors get it. Final responsibility is the trigger puller. Final responsibility to not socket the 'prop' gun to one's head or someone else's head is the trigger puller.

      Give me a car and I drive like a jackass, responsibility is mine.

      And latest reports are that Mr. High-and-Mighty was jackassing around.

      But with his history of violence towards women, was he? Will that history be admitted? Should it? Will we see a prosecutor do a deep dive like one did against the McCloskys? Or in the Aubrey shooting? Or any of the big self-defense shootings like Kyle Rittenhouse? Or will we just hear crickets because 'he's an actor'?

  7. I agree with you completely. The earlier commenter is an expert on everything or so he believes.

    1. Worse, he doesn't allow that anyone else knows more than he on anything he deigns to comment on.

      In a deleted comment he actually said that Andrew Branca didn't know what he was talking about!

    2. But he (the deleted commentator) does know more than Branca because he's an advisor to films and a film medic and he lives in California and stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. Or something.

    3. It's interesting that commented here and not at the link I gave to Mr Branca's post.

      You'd think he'd want to engage with Mr Branca and correct him, wouldn't you?

    4. One would. Then again, considering his huge flip-flop over the Covidiocracy (Follow the rules Peasants, I'm not following the rules Peasants) nothing surprises me anymore about Greek Philosopher Guy.

  8. Going slightly off topic, what was a strident anti-gunner doing waving a gum on screen in the first place? Why aren't anti gun rights dancing monkeys following their loudly shouted principles and swearing off on screen gun play? The only example of a principled stance I know of is Patrick McNee whose contract for The Avengers stipulated that John Steed never use a gun, citing his experiences in WWII.

    1. Well, he's an actor, so he can use the excuse of "I was acting." Like so many of Hollyweird's elite anti-gun crowd, who all made their money using guns.

      Or Dianne Feinstein, who carries a gun, but doesn't want you and I to because she's scared of us uppity dirt people.

  9. Yaknow? If 'teh actors, dur' are just flaming idiots with the IQ of a, well, dancing monkey, then maybe we should treat them when they go bad like how we treat real monkeys who go bad. If they are too stupid to be 'hooman' then treat them like the animals they are.

    In other words, put the mad ones down for our safety.

    That's following the logic of Greek Philosopher Guy, right?


You are a guest here when you comment. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work.

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.