https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-fatal-set-rust-shooting-mechanically-improper-source/story?id=98760315
Gun in fatal on-set 'Rust' shooting was mechanically improper, source says

Investigators effectively conducted an autopsy of the Colt .45 revolver and found that there were worn joints and that the trigger control was not functioning properly, according to the source.

It became evident to prosecutors the gun could fire without pressure on the trigger, according to the source.

In a statement Thursday night, Morrissey and Lewis said that "new facts were revealed that demand further investigation and forensic analysis in the case."


"Consequently, we cannot proceed under the current time constraints and on the facts and evidence turned over by law enforcement in its existing form. We therefore will be dismissing the involuntary manslaughter charges against Mr. Baldwin to conduct further investigation," they said. "This decision does not absolve Mr. Baldwin of criminal culpability and charges may be refiled. Our follow-up investigation will remain active and ongoing."

 

They should bring this guy onto a movie set, get some serious expert guidance. This particular guy is very interesting, intelligent and not your typical "gun nut".

 

You guys are so involved thinking about what happened on a movie set, but totally disregard what happens day in and day out in real time.

 

You guys are so involved thinking about what happened on a movie set, but totally disregard what happens day in and day out in real time.

I know, these damn horses are a major part of the crime wave that's destroying the city.
https://www.kptv.com/2023/04/21/2-horses-elude-police-se-portland-ppb-says/
2 horses ‘elude’ police in SE Portland, PPB says


That and the campfires all over the city.
https://www.kptv.com/2023/04/22/warming-fire-found-downtown-portland-parking-garage-elevator/

PORTLAND, Ore. (KPTV) - Firefighters were called to a warming fire in a parking garage elevator in downtown Portland on Saturday morning.

Portland Fire & Rescue said just after 10:30 a.m. Saturday, firefighters responded to the SmartPark garage in the 600 block of Southwest Third Avenue. They found the warming fire in an elevator on the seventh floor. They put the fire out and confirmed it was contained to the elevator.

The old west is going to hell.

 

Kind of hard not to take it political when in reality it is.

MOD NOTE:
It's actually pretty easy. Leave the politics out. If you can't do that, then ignore the thread. There are thousands of sites that welcome political discussions. AAC is not one of them.

 

Gun in fatal on-set 'Rust' shooting was mechanically improper, source says

Source must be the spin doctors hired by Baldwin.

FBI testing of the gun used in the fatal shooting on the movie set of “Rust” found that the weapon handled by actor Alec Baldwin could not be fired without pulling the trigger while the gun was cocked, according to a newly released forensics report.
'Rust' film set shooting: Weapon could not be fired without pulling the trigger, FBI forensic testing finds | CNN

 

Source must be the spin doctors hired by Baldwin.

FBI testing of the gun used in the fatal shooting on the movie set of “Rust” found that the weapon handled by actor Alec Baldwin could not be fired without pulling the trigger while the gun was cocked, according to a newly released forensics report.
'Rust' film set shooting: Weapon could not be fired without pulling the trigger, FBI forensic testing finds | CNN

It seems the DA trusts the latest gun investigators findings over the FBI forensics testing because the gun malfunctioned during FBI testing. Without a definitive finding on this critical point, the presumption of innocence goes to Baldwin IMO.

From your link:

An attorney for the actor told CNN on Sunday the FBI report “is being misconstrued.”

“The gun fired in testing only one time – without having to pull the trigger – when the hammer was pulled back and the gun broke in two different places,” attorney Luke Nikas said in an email to CNN. “The FBI was unable to fire the gun in any prior test, even when pulling the trigger, because it was in such poor condition.”
...

FBI examiners observed an internal malfunction of the gun during testing at the fully cocked position, with the report noting “portions of the trigger sear and cylinder stop fractured while the hammer was struck.”

The FBI report noted the limitations of the forensics testing, saying “it may not be possible to recreate or duplicate all of the circumstances which led to the discharge of a firearm without a pull of the trigger.”

 

The gun was fully operational, no wait, the gun was faulty. Now which is it? They come out with something then they come out with something else. Baldwin was handling a gun in an inappropriate manner resulting in a death. The armorer is also responsible and should share in the blame. Then too I am not the District Attorney but this should be easy enough to figure out.

Ron

 

The gun was fully operational, no wait, the gun was faulty. Now which is it?

This is the kind of thing that can give DAs (and plenty of others) sleepless nights. The FBI Forensics Lab declared that the gun could not fire except by pulling the trigger. Now that is being refuted by another lab. This potentially opens the door for appeals and motions to overturn convictions that were based, in part, on results from the FBI Forensics Lab.

 

They should bring this guy onto a movie set, get some serious expert guidance. This particular guy is very interesting, intelligent and not your typical "gun nut".

What are you basing your appraisal of what a "typical" "gun nut" is?

How they are portrayed in the movies?

How they are portrayed in the news?

I've been around shooters and shooting much of my life (started competitive shooting when I was nine years old) and this guy is far, far more typical of the people involved in shooting. I've only been around one "yahoo" that was even remotely close to the kind of behavior I've seen demonstrated endlessly in news stories (not to mention the movies and "reality" shows) and he was asked to leave almost immediately. The behavior I've generally encountered was much more typified by a guy at one of our annual Blow Up The World Parties and BBQ. These were informal get togethers (i.e., no posted rules, no range master, and all actions done by consensus) that lasted from shortly after sunrise until sunset (or later, on occasion) where people brought anything and everything, specifically anything unusual that others might like to shoot. One year I went through over eight thousand rounds of ammunition (most of it shot by others). We always had some homemade cannons, ranging from desktop ones that fired marbles to ones that fired pop cans filled with concrete (that one is actually a mortar) to one that fired 16 lb bowling balls. Most people were there to mostly plink and have a good time, while some always tried to do at least a little bit of serious marksmanship -- the latter usually involving bowling pins, gallon milk jugs, and pop cans at 450 yards (the longest distance available on that range). In the early years (before the bulk of us got old), there were usually a handful of kids that had never shot anything before and I always tried to invite one or two friends from work that had little or no shooting exposure. When we had a newbie, the first order of business was safety instruction and then there was almost always some kind of demonstration of the damage that someone can cause with a gun, typically a gallon milk jug filled with water. Seeing one of those hit with a high-powered round drives home the point that these are not toys.

Anyway, one year we had a guy that did some shooting in the morning and then fired up his BBQ about noon and had a beer with lunch. One beer. But before he pulled it out he declared that he was done shooting for the day (he left his guns out for anyone else to shoot). About 5 pm a late arrival came in who had a .50 BMG, which was a gun that this guy had always dreamed of shooting. It had been five hours since his one beer, but when he was offered a chance to shoot it, he declined because guns and alcohol don't mix well and he had a twelve-hour bottle-to-trigger rule (the FAA only imposes eight hours bottle-to-throttle). Although I don't think anyone would have batted an eye had he gone ahead and fired it (he was clearly not under the influence in any way), not one single person attempted to change his mind, we all respected and accepted his position.

 

MOD NOTE:
It's actually pretty easy. Leave the politics out. If you can't do that, then ignore the thread. There are thousands of sites that welcome political discussions. AAC is not one of them.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings by mentioning the truth.

 

What are you basing your appraisal of what a "typical" "gun nut" is?

How they are portrayed in the movies?

How they are portrayed in the news?

I've been around shooters and shooting much of my life (started competitive shooting when I was nine years old) and this guy is far, far more typical of the people involved in shooting. I've only been around one "yahoo" that was even remotely close to the kind of behavior I've seen demonstrated endlessly in news stories (not to mention the movies and "reality" shows) and he was asked to leave almost immediately. The behavior I've generally encountered was much more typified by a guy at one of our annual Blow Up The World Parties and BBQ. These were informal get togethers (i.e., no posted rules, no range master, and all actions done by consensus) that lasted from shortly after sunrise until sunset (or later, on occasion) where people brought anything and everything, specifically anything unusual that others might like to shoot. One year I went through over eight thousand rounds of ammunition (most of it shot by others). We always had some homemade cannons, ranging from desktop ones that fired marbles to ones that fired pop cans filled with concrete (that one is actually a mortar) to one that fired 16 lb bowling balls. Most people were there to mostly plink and have a good time, while some always tried to do at least a little bit of serious marksmanship -- the latter usually involving bowling pins, gallon milk jugs, and pop cans at 450 yards (the longest distance available on that range). In the early years (before the bulk of us got old), there were usually a handful of kids that had never shot anything before and I always tried to invite one or two friends from work that had little or no shooting exposure. When we had a newbie, the first order of business was safety instruction and then there was almost always some kind of demonstration of the damage that someone can cause with a gun, typically a gallon milk jug filled with water. Seeing one of those hit with a high-powered round drives home the point that these are not toys.

Anyway, one year we had a guy that did some shooting in the morning and then fired up his BBQ about noon and had a beer with lunch. One beer. But before he pulled it out he declared that he was done shooting for the day (he left his guns out for anyone else to shoot). About 5 pm a late arrival came in who had a .50 BMG, which was a gun that this guy had always dreamed of shooting. It had been five hours since his one beer, but when he was offered a chance to shoot it, he declined because guns and alcohol don't mix well and he had a twelve-hour bottle-to-trigger rule (the FAA only imposes eight hours bottle-to-throttle). Although I don't think anyone would have batted an eye had he gone ahead and fired it (he was clearly not under the influence in any way), not one single person attempted to change his mind, we all respected and accepted his position.

Gun nuts:





etc, etc.

 

Sorry if I hurt your feelings by mentioning the truth.

Mod Note:
My feelings have nothing to do with it, and neither do your attempts to make things personal. You have been told to abide by AAC guidelines and have indicated that you don't think that's possible. Fair warning has been given.

 

way too many "coincidences". some people will do anything to avoid responsibility for something they did all by themselves.
He may not intended any harm, but his actions tell difference story

Baldwin (video clip at 1':30"): "Nonono, i would never point gun and pull trigger"

but since two victims were hit and one of them died, it is obvious that gun was pointed... so that alone was a lie.
the next part is decide if one should believe him that he never pulled trigger. FBI report says he had to.
And even if the gun was defective, why it was loaded with live rounds?

 

Gun nuts:

etc, etc.

A couple of photoshopped pictures prove.... what?

Would a picture of a family that was into skiing and posed with each person holding a pair of skis make them "ski nuts" (in the same pejorative sense)? Of each posing with a mountain bike? Or a motorcycle? Or in their sci-fi convention costumes?

 

A couple of photoshopped pictures prove.... what?

Would a picture of a family that was into skiing and posed with each person holding a pair of skis make them "ski nuts" (in the same pejorative sense)? Of each posing with a mountain bike? Or a motorcycle? Or in their sci-fi convention costumes?

Seriously? I regard those people, certainly the adults, as "gun nuts", posing with a gun at all is bizarre, what is the point other than to emphasize the cult of the gun? the belief that killing is a Christian ethic and so on - nuts.

 

way too many "coincidences".

Baldwin (video clip at 1':30"): "Nonono, i would never point gun and pull trigger"

but since two victims were hit and one of them died, it is obvious that gun was pointed...
the next part is decide if one should believe him that he never pulled trigger. FBI report says he had to.
And even if the gun was defective, why it was loaded with live rounds?

Tragic accidents (and, regardless of who is to blame for what, this was an accident and not an intentional act) almost always have a chain of events involving multiple failures in which any single one of them, if done properly, would have prevented it. Consequently, most accidents, by the very fact that they happened, are going to have "way too many coincidences" simply because that is what was required for the accident to occur in the first place.

In the wake of such accidents, aside from the issue of assigning any blame and punishment that is appropriate, should be an analysis of what all of those "coincidences" were and what steps can and should be taken to prevent each of them from occurring again. And it's not enough to just say, "So and so violated this or that policy." A policy is useless if it isn't followed. So why wasn't it followed? Did the people know about the policy? Was the policy clear? Was there a culture where people didn't feel the need to take policies seriously? If so, was this because they didn't feel bound to abide by policies in general, or was it because they didn't understand why these policies were necessary? Was the policy ignored because it was seen as being overboard or interfering with getting the job done? If so, WAS the policy interfering with getting the job done to the point people felt it had to be ignored, in whole or in part, in order to get the job done?

 

Seriously?

Yes. How is a family that is into shooting and that poses with the tools of that activity any different than a family that is into any other activity posing with the tools of that activity?

Years ago, my cousins used as their Christmas photo a picture of them all lined up holding up the biggest fish that each of them had caught on their vacation that year, all decked out in all the fishing gear they could find. Did this make them "fish nuts"?

You could almost certainly find some ultra-vegan that would say that it does.

 

"I never pulled the trigger" reminds me of the tale about the NFL player who walked into the house at 6AM and his wife asked "Just where have you been". His answer was "I got in late and didn't want to wake you so I slept in the hammock on the patio". His wife says "We took the hammock down a month ago". His response was "Well, that's my story and I'm sticking to it!" I'm sure Baldwin's attorney told him to stick to his story!

 

Yes. How is a family that is into shooting and that poses with the tools of that activity any different than a family that is into any other activity posing with the tools of that activity?

I think the answer to that might have to focus on the motivation for taking such a picture, the intent of the image and the intent of distributing it to others. Do they consider what impact it might have on others, perhaps others who have been impacted by gun crime?

I have guns, you'll not see me taking a picture posing with it or associating it with a religious festival. It is this trivializing of guns, treating them as "tools" or "props" that I object too. This is all deeply embedded in US culture, in movies and the media and the press, the normalization of killing.

It is so deeply ingrained that many Americans cannot see how it appears to outsiders, most have never seen guns other than from the US perspective which is exemplified in movies and television and sadly Christmas cards.

Years ago, my cousins used as their Christmas photo a picture of them all lined up holding up the biggest fish that each of them had caught on their vacation that year, all decked out in all the fishing gear they could find. Did this make them "fish nuts"?

You could almost certainly find some ultra-vegan that would say that it does.

Well "gun nut" is of course a euphemism. In my case I used it to represent a person who has a reverence for guns, sees no harm in perpetuating the myth that guns are in fact nothing but tools, that restricting and reducing access to guns is to be opposed without question, a fanatic.

A gun nut is - for me - a person I would not want to be around when using guns, a person who has an infatuation with guns and gun culture.

I know several police officers, some senior, SWAT team commanders and so on, who would never pose or make light of guns as in these Christmas cards, these are the kind of people I'd be comfortable around under pressure, not these types:



Threatening people in the street? pointing a gun? having a finger ON THE TRIGGER, these are gun nuts and they should not have been pardoned either (especially as they were indicted by a grand jury) that right there is a felony even here in Arizona, no respect for or even enforcement of, the law.

Let me know if you'd like more examples, there's lots to choose from: