User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 12:58:43 PM EDT
[#1]
So the check finally cleared. One justice for all.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 1:07:26 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Under certain circumstances, pointing guns at people is in fact considered to be safe enough to justify doing so. I've already cited force on force training as an example: thousands of times per year, military service members point guns at each other. Jeff Cooper, father of the four rules, thought there were allowable exceptions. He took this photograph, with his pistol pointed at the cameraman and his finger on the trigger. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Combat_masters_A1.jpg/800px-Combat_masters_A1.jpg SAG thinks there are exceptions. The first rule in safety bulletin number 1 talks about doing so. Like I said, I know you want the four rules to apply everywhere, all the time, but professional firearms users disagree with you. If a death was inherently proof that there was a lack of due caution and circumstance then you wouldn't need to say that manslaughter is a death that occurs due to a lack of due cation and circumstance. Are you familiar with the word "tautology"? Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The rules require the actor to refuse to do anything that would be unsafe. Is pointing guns at people safe? What are the allowable exceptions to the rule? The rule applies on movie sets, same as everywhere else. See the Youtube video by the movie armorer who explains it. Under certain circumstances, pointing guns at people is in fact considered to be safe enough to justify doing so. I've already cited force on force training as an example: thousands of times per year, military service members point guns at each other. Jeff Cooper, father of the four rules, thought there were allowable exceptions. He took this photograph, with his pistol pointed at the cameraman and his finger on the trigger. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Combat_masters_A1.jpg/800px-Combat_masters_A1.jpg SAG thinks there are exceptions. The first rule in safety bulletin number 1 talks about doing so. Like I said, I know you want the four rules to apply everywhere, all the time, but professional firearms users disagree with you. Quoted: The NM manslaughter law says that manslaughter is any death caused "without due caution or circumspection." The dead body proves that there was not "due caution or circumspection." If a death was inherently proof that there was a lack of due caution and circumstance then you wouldn't need to say that manslaughter is a death that occurs due to a lack of due cation and circumstance. Are you familiar with the word "tautology"? Quoted: So, if you were in AB's place, you would have killed the woman and blamed someone else, even when you know that pointing guns at people is unsafe. Is that correct? Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? The professional movie armorer says that it is never allowed on film sets. You don't know whether there was anyone actually behind the camera at the time. It is easy enough to trip a camera without being behind it. AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE fOR YOUR OWN SAfETY AND THE SAfETY Of YOUR fELLOW CAST MEMBERS. Production management and crew are responsible for creating and maintaining safe conditions, but it is your right and responsibility to double check the set up to ensure your own Safety. That's the first rule. Where does it say there are exceptions? Yes, the dead body is always proof that someone did not use "due caution and circumspection". No other way it could happen. And, you got the wording wrong. Answering simple questions isn't your strong suit, is it? In the same situation, would you have killed her, or not? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 1:18:05 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: [color=#073763]The professional movie armorer says that it is never allowed on film sets. Quote HistoryQuoted: [color=#073763]The professional movie armorer says that it is never allowed on film sets. Yeah, that's cool, but in observable reality you can see actors pointing guns at people in movies. Quoted: You don't know whether there was anyone actually behind the camera at the time. It is easy enough to trip a camera without being behind it.[/color] I do know that there was someone behind the camera because one of the other guys in the photograph wrote about it. https://web.archive.org/web/20220522161213/https://topgunmotorcycles.com/new/?p=1465 Quoted: AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE fOR YOUR OWN SAfETY AND THE SAfETY Of YOUR fELLOW CAST MEMBERS. Production management and crew are responsible for creating and maintaining safe conditions, but it is your right and responsibility to double check the set up to ensure your own Safety. That's the first rule. Where does it say there are exceptions? In safety bulletin #1, which covers the use of firearms. Quoted: Yes, the dead body is always proof that someone did not use "due caution and circumspection". No other way it could happen. And, you got the wording wrong. Lol. By your logic every death is a manslaughter because every death shows that someone did not use due caution and circumspection. You see how that's dumb, right? Quoted: Answering simple questions isn't your strong suit, is it? In the same situation, would you have killed her, or not? It's a wife beating question that doesn't deserve answering. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 1:34:01 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The professional movie armorer says that it is never allowed on film sets. You don't know whether there was anyone actually behind the camera at the time. It is easy enough to trip a camera without being behind it. AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE fOR YOUR OWN SAfETY AND THE SAfETY Of YOUR fELLOW CAST MEMBERS. Production management and crew are responsible for creating and maintaining safe conditions, but it is your right and responsibility to double check the set up to ensure your own Safety. That's the first rule. Where does it say there are exceptions? Yes, the dead body is always proof that someone did not use "due caution and circumspection". No other way it could happen. And, you got the wording wrong. Answering simple questions isn't your strong suit, is it? In the same situation, would you have killed her, or not? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The rules require the actor to refuse to do anything that would be unsafe. Is pointing guns at people safe? What are the allowable exceptions to the rule? The rule applies on movie sets, same as everywhere else. See the Youtube video by the movie armorer who explains it. Under certain circumstances, pointing guns at people is in fact considered to be safe enough to justify doing so. I've already cited force on force training as an example: thousands of times per year, military service members point guns at each other. Jeff Cooper, father of the four rules, thought there were allowable exceptions. He took this photograph, with his pistol pointed at the cameraman and his finger on the trigger. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Combat_masters_A1.jpg/800px-Combat_masters_A1.jpg SAG thinks there are exceptions. The first rule in safety bulletin number 1 talks about doing so. Like I said, I know you want the four rules to apply everywhere, all the time, but professional firearms users disagree with you. Quoted: The NM manslaughter law says that manslaughter is any death caused "without due caution or circumspection." The dead body proves that there was not "due caution or circumspection." If a death was inherently proof that there was a lack of due caution and circumstance then you wouldn't need to say that manslaughter is a death that occurs due to a lack of due cation and circumstance. Are you familiar with the word "tautology"? Quoted: So, if you were in AB's place, you would have killed the woman and blamed someone else, even when you know that pointing guns at people is unsafe. Is that correct? Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? The professional movie armorer says that it is never allowed on film sets. You don't know whether there was anyone actually behind the camera at the time. It is easy enough to trip a camera without being behind it. AS AN ACTOR, YOU ARE ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE fOR YOUR OWN SAfETY AND THE SAfETY Of YOUR fELLOW CAST MEMBERS. Production management and crew are responsible for creating and maintaining safe conditions, but it is your right and responsibility to double check the set up to ensure your own Safety. That's the first rule. Where does it say there are exceptions? Yes, the dead body is always proof that someone did not use "due caution and circumspection". No other way it could happen. And, you got the wording wrong. Answering simple questions isn't your strong suit, is it? In the same situation, would you have killed her, or not? There is absolutely no point to your question. Unless you can cite case law supporting your notion that the 4 rules are legally enforceable in criminal court, they are completely irrelevant. Any jury would agree that hiring a professional movie armorer to ensure that everyone on the set was safe was in fact exercising due caution and circumspection. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 1:55:29 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, that's cool, but in observable reality you can see actors pointing guns at people in movies. I do know that there was someone behind the camera because one of the other guys in the photograph wrote about it. https://web.archive.org/web/20220522161213/https://topgunmotorcycles.com/new/?p=1465 In safety bulletin #1, which covers the use of firearms. Lol. By your logic every death is a manslaughter because every death shows that someone did not use due caution and circumspection. You see how that's dumb, right? It's a wife beating question that doesn't deserve answering. I quoted that safety bulletin. It says nothing specific about firearms. Yep. Any death with a gun means the person holding the gun violated multiple safety rules. Guns don't shoot themselves? What does the professional movie armorer say about pointing guns at people on movie sets? It is a simple question. Would you do the same thing AB did? Yes, or no. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 1:57:15 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is absolutely no point to your question. Unless you can cite case law supporting your notion that the 4 rules are legally enforceable in criminal court, they are completely irrelevant. Any jury would agree that hiring a professional movie armorer to ensure that everyone on the set was safe was in fact exercising due caution and circumspection. How do dead bodies happen if the person holding the gun follows basic safety rules? What does the movie armorer say about pointing guns at people on movie sets? Would you do the same thing AB did? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:11:21 PM EDT
[#7]
Note to self: I didn't pull the trigger.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:20:30 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I quoted that safety bulletin. It says nothing specific about firearms. Quote HistoryQuoted: I quoted that safety bulletin. It says nothing specific about firearms. No, you didn't. You quoted the introduction. Scroll down to safety bulletin #1, "RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAFETY WITH FIREARMS AND USE OF "BLANK AMMUNITION"" Quoted: Yep. Any death with a gun means the person holding the gun violated multiple safety rules. Guns don't shoot themselves? Hypothetical situation: while shooting at a commercial range, a bullet ricochets off something buried in the berm and strikes and kills another person. What safety rules did the shooter violate, and how did he fail to exercise due caution? Quoted: What does the professional movie armorer say about pointing guns at people on movie sets?  American Gangster: Somebody or Nobody This is a clip from a movie. In it you can see a firearm pressed to the head of Idris Elba. Guns get pointed at people on movies sets, and it's silly to pretend otherwise. Quoted: It is a simple question. Would you do the same thing AB did? Yes, or no. I'll tell you what: I'll give you a yes out no answer as soon as you give me a yes or no answer to this question: have you stopped beating your wife? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:25:49 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, you didn't. You quoted the introduction. Scroll down to safety bulletin #1, "RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAFETY WITH FIREARMS AND USE OF "BLANK AMMUNITION"" Hypothetical situation: while shooting at a commercial range, a bullet ricochets off something buried in the berm and strikes and kills another person. What safety rules did the shooter violate, and how did he fail to exercise due caution?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfJoR9snS98This is a clip from a movie. In it you can see a firearm pressed to the head of Idris Elba. Guns get pointed at people on movies sets, and it's silly to pretend otherwise. I'll tell you what: I'll give you a yes out no answer as soon as you give me a yes or no answer to this question: have you stopped beating your wife? Let me quote that part, even though you didn't. 11. FIREARMS & OTHER WEAPONS Treat all weapons as though they are loaded and/or ready to use. Do not play with weapons and never point one at anyone, including yourself. Same thing the movie armorer said. You don't know whether that is a real gun or a fake. According to the rules, as stated in Safety Bulletin #1 and by the movie armorer, it had to be a fake. My answer to the simple question is: No, I would not have done what AB did. I would have told them to move the people, first. What would you do? It isn't a trick question, at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:29:15 PM EDT
[#10]
Any of us would hang...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:38:54 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Let me quote that part, even though you didn't. 11. FIREARMS & OTHER WEAPONS Treat all weapons as though they are loaded and/or ready to use. Do not play with weapons and never point one at anyone, including yourself. Same thing the movie armorer said. Quote HistoryQuoted: Let me quote that part, even though you didn't. 11. FIREARMS & OTHER WEAPONS Treat all weapons as though they are loaded and/or ready to use. Do not play with weapons and never point one at anyone, including yourself. Same thing the movie armorer said. You have once again failed to quote safety bulletin #1. Since reading, like logic, is obviously not your strong suit, I'll help you. "1. Refrain from pointing a firearm at anyone, including yourself. If it is absolutely necessary to do so on camera, consult the Property Master..." So the rules say don't point a firearm at anyone unless you have to, in which case you can. Quoted: You don't know whether that is a real gun or a fake. According to the rules, as stated in Safety Bulletin #1 and by the movie armorer, it had to be a fake. Lol. Quoted: My answer to the simple question is: No, I would not have done what AB did. I would have told them to move the people, first. What would you do? It isn't a trick question, at all. You answered your simple question, not mine. Yes or no, have you stopped beating your wife? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:44:52 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You have once again failed to quote safety bulletin #1. Since reading, like logic, is obviously not your strong suit, I'll help you. "1. Refrain from pointing a firearm at anyone, including yourself. If it is absolutely necessary to do so on camera, consult the Property Master..." So the rules say don't point a firearm at anyone unless you have to, in which case you can. Lol. You answered your simple question, not mine. Yes or no, have you stopped beating your wife? The movie armorer says that pointing guns at people is never necessary. It can be done other ways. He is the prop master in that case. Again, you have no clue whether the gun was real. My question does not assume guilt, as your question does. Would you do what AB did? If you have a problem with that, it is obvious why. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:50:11 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How do dead bodies happen if the person holding the gun follows basic safety rules? What does the movie armorer say about pointing guns at people on movie sets? Would you do the same thing AB did? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: There is absolutely no point to your question. Unless you can cite case law supporting your notion that the 4 rules are legally enforceable in criminal court, they are completely irrelevant. Any jury would agree that hiring a professional movie armorer to ensure that everyone on the set was safe was in fact exercising due caution and circumspection. How do dead bodies happen if the person holding the gun follows basic safety rules? What does the movie armorer say about pointing guns at people on movie sets? Would you do the same thing AB did? Why are you obsessed with what other people would do? It has nothing to do with what happened. That movie armorer that was there to keep everyone safe with your rules, actually caused the death by not following their own rules. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:54:36 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You have once again failed to quote safety bulletin #1. Since reading, like logic, is obviously not your strong suit, I'll help you. "1. Refrain from pointing a firearm at anyone, including yourself. If it is absolutely necessary to do so on camera, consult the Property Master..." So the rules say don't point a firearm at anyone unless you have to, in which case you can. Lol. You answered your simple question, not mine. Yes or no, have you stopped beating your wife? It also says: Remember that any object at which you point a firearm could be destroyed. Then it goes on to say: GENERAL SAFE USE AND HANDLING OF FIREARMS 1. NEVER POINT a firearm at anyone, including yourself. 2. NEVER PLACE your finger on the trigger until you are ready to shoot. Keep your finger alongside the firearm and off the trigger. It emphasizes that guns are never to be pointed at anyone in several different places. What would you do in AB's situation? Not a trick question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:56:24 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why are you obsessed with what other people would do? It has nothing to do with what happened. That movie armorer that was there to keep everyone safe with your rules, actually caused the death by not following their own rules. Because I was always taught that the person holding the gun can prevent any tragedies if they follow the rules, no matter what anyone else did. I was also taught that there is no good excuse for negligently killing someone with a weapon. What were you taught? What would you do in AB's situation? Do you have a problem with a simple question? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 2:57:05 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why are you obsessed with what other people would do? It has nothing to do with what happened. That movie armorer that was there to keep everyone safe with your rules, actually caused the death by not following their own rules. And, again, the question was: What did the movie armorer say about pointing guns at people? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:01:07 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't care about AB one way or the other. I don't think I have ever seen five minutes of anything he did. My decision is based on standard gun safety rules that I learned before I was in junior high. Those rules apply everywhere, even on movie sets. I was taught that, if you are holding the gun, you own the results. What were you taught? Would you do the same as AB -- kill the woman and then try to blame everyone else? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This. Pearl clutchers want to lock the guy up because he's a commie. I get that and it's fair, but this "case" was never going to fly. I don't care about AB one way or the other. I don't think I have ever seen five minutes of anything he did. My decision is based on standard gun safety rules that I learned before I was in junior high. Those rules apply everywhere, even on movie sets. I was taught that, if you are holding the gun, you own the results. What were you taught? Would you do the same as AB -- kill the woman and then try to blame everyone else? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:06:03 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Under certain circumstances, pointing guns at people is in fact considered to be safe enough to justify doing so. I've already cited force on force training as an example: thousands of times per year, military service members point guns at each other. Jeff Cooper, father of the four rules, thought there were allowable exceptions. He took this photograph, with his pistol pointed at the cameraman and his finger on the trigger. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Combat_masters_A1.jpg/800px-Combat_masters_A1.jpg SAG thinks there are exceptions. The first rule in safety bulletin number 1 talks about doing so. Like I said, I know you want the four rules to apply everywhere, all the time, but professional firearms users disagree with you. If a death was inherently proof that there was a lack of due caution and circumstance then you wouldn't need to say that manslaughter is a death that occurs due to a lack of due cation and circumstance. Are you familiar with the word "tautology"? Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The rules require the actor to refuse to do anything that would be unsafe. Is pointing guns at people safe? What are the allowable exceptions to the rule? The rule applies on movie sets, same as everywhere else. See the Youtube video by the movie armorer who explains it. Under certain circumstances, pointing guns at people is in fact considered to be safe enough to justify doing so. I've already cited force on force training as an example: thousands of times per year, military service members point guns at each other. Jeff Cooper, father of the four rules, thought there were allowable exceptions. He took this photograph, with his pistol pointed at the cameraman and his finger on the trigger. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Combat_masters_A1.jpg/800px-Combat_masters_A1.jpg SAG thinks there are exceptions. The first rule in safety bulletin number 1 talks about doing so. Like I said, I know you want the four rules to apply everywhere, all the time, but professional firearms users disagree with you. Quoted: The NM manslaughter law says that manslaughter is any death caused "without due caution or circumspection." The dead body proves that there was not "due caution or circumspection." If a death was inherently proof that there was a lack of due caution and circumstance then you wouldn't need to say that manslaughter is a death that occurs due to a lack of due cation and circumstance. Are you familiar with the word "tautology"? Quoted: So, if you were in AB's place, you would have killed the woman and blamed someone else, even when you know that pointing guns at people is unsafe. Is that correct? Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? For that matter, any time you point a gun at the ground you're also pointing it towards someone in China 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:06:40 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was taught I can point cap guns and water piatols at people. If someone secretly tooled up my cap gun to fire a 22lr then I wouldn't feel responsible for shooting someone. I would blame the person who set up a fake gun to shoot real bullets. It wasn't a cap gun or a water pistol and AB knew it. He was told it wasn't. So, you are saying that you would have done the same thing AB did. Is that correct? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:07:21 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think we're talking with someone who wouldn't go the 2nd story of a building with a holstered pistol because he'd be pointing the gun at people on the first level, albeit through the floor. For that matter, any time you point a gun at the ground you're also pointing it towards someone in China Which gun instructor taught you that stuff about China? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:08:01 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wasn't a cap gun or a water pistol and AB knew it. He was told it wasn't. So, you are saying that you would have done the same thing AB did. Is that correct? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I was taught I can point cap guns and water piatols at people. If someone secretly tooled up my cap gun to fire a 22lr then I wouldn't feel responsible for shooting someone. I would blame the person who set up a fake gun to shoot real bullets. It wasn't a cap gun or a water pistol and AB knew it. He was told it wasn't. So, you are saying that you would have done the same thing AB did. Is that correct? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:10:00 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Which gun instructor taught you that stuff about China? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I think we're talking with someone who wouldn't go the 2nd story of a building with a holstered pistol because he'd be pointing the gun at people on the first level, albeit through the floor. For that matter, any time you point a gun at the ground you're also pointing it towards someone in China Which gun instructor taught you that stuff about China? Do you only walk around on the lowest level of a building if you're carrying a holstered pistol, just to make sure you don't point it through the floor at innocents below you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:13:38 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why, you did! Do you only walk around on the lowest level of a building if you're carrying a holstered pistol, just to make sure you don't point it through the floor at innocents below you? I consider berms and barriers and whether they are sufficient to stop bullets. How about you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:15:19 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So someone told him it was a real firearm loaded with real ammo, and he walked up and popped someone with it? Is that correct? He was told it was a real firearm. Real firearms are to be treated as loaded, even if you have confirmed that they are not. Loaded or unloaded, they are not to be pointed at people. Is this new information for you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:15:50 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why, you did! Do you only walk around on the lowest level of a building if you're carrying a holstered pistol, just to make sure you don't point it through the floor at innocents below you? Would you do the same thing AB did? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:19:26 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because I was always taught that the person holding the gun can prevent any tragedies if they follow the rules, no matter what anyone else did. I was also taught that there is no good excuse for negligently killing someone with a weapon. What were you taught? What would you do in AB's situation? Do you have a problem with a simple question? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Why are you obsessed with what other people would do? It has nothing to do with what happened. That movie armorer that was there to keep everyone safe with your rules, actually caused the death by not following their own rules. Because I was always taught that the person holding the gun can prevent any tragedies if they follow the rules, no matter what anyone else did. I was also taught that there is no good excuse for negligently killing someone with a weapon. What were you taught? What would you do in AB's situation? Do you have a problem with a simple question? No, I have a problem with a stupid question. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 3:23:21 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, I have a problem with a stupid question. What would you do? Are you saying you would do something stupid? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 4:07:18 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And, again, the question was: What did the movie armorer say about pointing guns at people? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Why are you obsessed with what other people would do? It has nothing to do with what happened. That movie armorer that was there to keep everyone safe with your rules, actually caused the death by not following their own rules. And, again, the question was: What did the movie armorer say about pointing guns at people? It doesn't matter what he said. It only matters what AB thought and did. Did he take measures to insure that no one would get shot? Yes. Did he reasonably believe that those measures made it "safe" for him to point and fire a prop gun on the set? Yes. "Safe", in this case, means nothing will happen when you pull the trigger. It doesn't mean that it's okay to do, or that it's in accordance with the 4 rules, or the armorer's rules. "Due caution and circumspection" isn't defined by their rules, or any other special rules, just because firearms are involved. The criminal code says just what it says. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 4:07:36 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The movie armorer says that pointing guns at people is never necessary. It can be done other ways. He is the prop master in that case. Quote HistoryQuoted: The movie armorer says that pointing guns at people is never necessary. It can be done other ways. He is the prop master in that case. No he doesn't. He says you're not supposed to point guns at people, and that when people are actually shooting each other it's done by cheating the shot, but he doesn't actually say that it's never necessary to point a gun at someone. Even if he had that would be one man's opinion, not a rule universally followed by productions. Why do you think they wrote the rules to allow for the possibility of it being necessary? Quoted: Again, you have no clue whether the gun was real. Does this one look fake?  How about in this scene, where you can see the cylinder rotate, the hammer retract and fall, and can even see the hammer nose pinned in place?  Russian Roulette 2 My dude, if you seriously believe that guns are never pointed at people on movie sets, you're living in fantasy land. Quoted: My question does not assume guilt, as your question does. Would you do what AB did? If you have a problem with that, it is obvious why. Sure it does. If someone says yes, you'll declare them unsafe because they would have killed someone. If someone says no, that they would would do literally anything different, you'll say that proves no reasonable person would do what Baldwin did. I would also note you didn't answer my question about the hypothetical person who killed someone else with ricochet. Is that because you don't want to admit that a body is not sufficient proof that someone was negligent? Quoted: ' It also says: Remember that any object at which you point a firearm could be destroyed. Then it goes on to say: GENERAL SAFE USE AND HANDLING OF FIREARMS 1. NEVER POINT a firearm at anyone, including yourself. 2. NEVER PLACE your finger on the trigger until you are ready to shoot. Keep your finger alongside the firearm and off the trigger. It emphasizes that guns are never to be pointed at anyone in several different places. What would you do in AB's situation? Not a trick question. As we've already talked about, the rules say that you should never do it, unless you have to and a safety rep like the 1st AD says it's cool, in which case you absolutely can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 4:19:14 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No he doesn't. He says you're not supposed to point guns at people, and that when people are actually shooting each other it's done by cheating the shot, but he doesn't actually say that it's never necessary to point a gun at someone. Even if he had that would be one man's opinion, not a rule universally followed by productions. Why do you think they wrote the rules to allow for the possibility of it being necessary? Does this one look fake? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EmarAv1XMAAZMU3.jpg:large How about in this scene, where you can see the cylinder rotate, the hammer retract and fall, and can even see the hammer nose pinned in place? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGD-waymyLwMy dude, if you seriously believe that guns are never pointed at people on movie sets, you're living in fantasy land. Sure it does. If someone says yes, you'll declare them unsafe because they would have killed someone. If someone says no, that they would would do literally anything different, you'll say that proves no reasonable person would do what Baldwin did. I would also note you didn't answer my question about the hypothetical person who killed someone else with ricochet. Is that because you don't want to admit that a body is not sufficient proof that someone was negligent? As we've already talked about, the rules say that you should never do it, unless you have to and a safety rep like the 1st AD says it's cool, in which case you absolutely can. You can buy fakes for less than the price of real guns. They are good enough that you wouldn't know unless you held them in your hands. I had a friend who bought some for his semi-retarded son to play with. Movie scenes are made up. If they can't figure out how to film them safely, then they need a new job. So, what would you do? It's an easy question. No tricks. If you wouldn't point the gun at someone then, yes, you would know it was not safe. Your failure to answer shows your answer. The rule is actually, "Keep the gun pointed in a safe direction at all times." That covers ricochets, etc. So, you would do the exact same thing AB did? Correct? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 4:20:53 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It doesn't matter what he said. It only matters what AB thought and did. Did he take measures to insure that no one would get shot? Yes. Did he reasonably believe that those measures made it "safe" for him to point and fire a prop gun on the set? Yes. "Safe", in this case, means nothing will happen when you pull the trigger. It doesn't mean that it's okay to do, or that it's in accordance with the 4 rules, or the armorer's rules. "Due caution and circumspection" isn't defined by their rules, or any other special rules, just because firearms are involved. The criminal code says just what it says. If he took measures to insure that no one would get shot, then how did she get shot? Would you do what AB did? That's not a stupid question. Your answer might be. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 4:33:20 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can buy fakes for less than the price of real guns. They are good enough that you wouldn't know unless you held them in your hands. I had a friend who bought some for his semi-retarded son to play with. Quote HistoryQuoted: You can buy fakes for less than the price of real guns. They are good enough that you wouldn't know unless you held them in your hands. I had a friend who bought some for his semi-retarded son to play with. Cool story. Movies usually use real guns converted to blank fire. This G17 from Die Hard 2, for example, was converted by milling the locking ledge off the barrel as you can clearly see in the picture.  Note that it's pointed at someone. Quoted: Movie scenes are made up. If they can't figure out how to film them safely, then they need a new job. I understand your opinion. Please understand that I value your opinion on accordance with what I paid for it. Quoted: So, what would you do? It's an easy question. No tricks. If you wouldn't point the gun at someone then, yes, you would know it was not safe. Your failure to answer shows your answer. What if my answer is yes? Or if my answer is that I would point the gun, but wouldn't have manipulated the hammer? And what does my answer, as a gun enthusiast, have to do with the legal standard? Quoted: The rule is actually, "Keep the gun pointed in a safe direction at all times." That covers ricochets, etc. So you believe that if someone at a commercial range has a ricochet off something buried in the backstop, and if that ricochet kills someone, the shooter is guilty of manslaughter? Lol. Quoted: So, you would do the exact same thing AB did? Correct? Derping over and over won't make it smart. Quoted: ... Would you do what AB did? That's not a stupid question. Your answer might be. Some people say there are no stupid questions, only stupid people. I disagree, but some people say that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 4:42:27 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Cool story. Movies usually use real guns converted to blank fire. This G17 from Die Hard 2, for example, was converted by milling the locking ledge off the barrel as you can clearly see in the picture. https://www.imfdb.org/images/5/53/DH2_Glock-3.jpg Note that it's pointed at someone. I understand your opinion. Please understand that I value your opinion on accordance with what I paid for it. What if my answer is yes? Or if my answer is that I would point the gun, but wouldn't have manipulated the hammer? And what does my answer, as a gun enthusiast, have to do with the legal standard? So you believe that if someone at a commercial range has a ricochet off something buried in the backstop, and if that ricochet kills someone, the shooter is guilty of manslaughter? Lol. Derping over and over won't make it smart. Some people say there are no stupid questions, only stupid people. I disagree, but some people say that. Then the gun is no longer capable of shooting anything but blanks, which can kill people at that range. Therefore, not safe. Could have been done with a gun with a solid barrel. right? Likewise with your opinion, which is worth even less if you would wind up killing someone. That's a problem with the range setup. Not this situation, at all. Your answer points out that you know the situation would be dangerous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 4:45:53 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If he took measures to insure that no one would get shot, then how did she get shot? Would you do what AB did? That's not a stupid question. Your answer might be. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: It doesn't matter what he said. It only matters what AB thought and did. Did he take measures to insure that no one would get shot? Yes. Did he reasonably believe that those measures made it "safe" for him to point and fire a prop gun on the set? Yes. "Safe", in this case, means nothing will happen when you pull the trigger. It doesn't mean that it's okay to do, or that it's in accordance with the 4 rules, or the armorer's rules. "Due caution and circumspection" isn't defined by their rules, or any other special rules, just because firearms are involved. The criminal code says just what it says. If he took measures to insure that no one would get shot, then how did she get shot? Would you do what AB did? That's not a stupid question. Your answer might be. If I build a balcony on my house without regard to building codes, and it collapses and kills someone, is it my fault? Of course. What if I didn't want it to collapse, so I hire an engineer to design it, and a builder to build it? Would you consider that due caution and circumspection? What if the builder cheated on materials, and it falls and kills people? Would I go to prison for not finding out that the builder didn't follow the design? I took measures to make sure that no one got killed, and they got killed anyway. See how that works? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 5:02:34 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Then the gun is no longer capable of shooting anything but blanks, which can kill people at that range. Therefore, not safe. Could have been done with a gun with a solid barrel. right? Quote HistoryQuoted: Then the gun is no longer capable of shooting anything but blanks, which can kill people at that range. Therefore, not safe. Could have been done with a gun with a solid barrel. right? Is the relevant legal standard 'could have been done safer'? Quoted: Likewise with your opinion, which is worth even less if you would wind up killing someone. And there it is; exactly how I said you'd reply if someone said yes. Quoted: That's a problem with the range setup. Not this situation, at all. Oh, wow, thanks for pointing out that my hypothetical situation isn't the situation at hand. Very insightful. The point is that someone getting shot is not inherently proof that the shooter failed to exercise due caution. Quoted: Your answer points out that you know the situation would be dangerous. I didn't answer the question; I asked how you would respond to certain answers. Let's say I said no; that I wouldn't point the gun. How would that relate to the relevant legal standard? Let's say I said yes, that I would point the gun. How would that relate to the relevant legal standard? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 8:40:47 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why are you obsessed with what other people would do? It has nothing to do with what happened. That movie armorer that was there to keep everyone safe with your rules, actually caused the death by not following their own rules. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is absolutely no point to your question. Unless you can cite case law supporting your notion that the 4 rules are legally enforceable in criminal court, they are completely irrelevant. Any jury would agree that hiring a professional movie armorer to ensure that everyone on the set was safe was in fact exercising due caution and circumspection. How do dead bodies happen if the person holding the gun follows basic safety rules? What does the movie armorer say about pointing guns at people on movie sets? Would you do the same thing AB did? Why are you obsessed with what other people would do? It has nothing to do with what happened. That movie armorer that was there to keep everyone safe with your rules, actually caused the death by not following their own rules. For you other people casting accusations, I'll see if I can go through my year old research and repost it. I'll leave the grammar nazi shit alone, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 8:45:18 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I was taught I can point cap guns and water piatols at people. If someone secretly tooled up my cap gun to fire a 22lr then I wouldn't feel responsible for shooting someone. I would blame the person who set up a fake gun to shoot real bullets. So, are you saying you still play with cap guns, or that FAB has the mind of a child? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 8:48:17 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think we're talking with someone who wouldn't go the 2nd story of a building with a holstered pistol because he'd be pointing the gun at people on the first level, albeit through the floor. For that matter, any time you point a gun at the ground you're also pointing it towards someone in China Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The rules require the actor to refuse to do anything that would be unsafe. Is pointing guns at people safe? What are the allowable exceptions to the rule? The rule applies on movie sets, same as everywhere else. See the Youtube video by the movie armorer who explains it. Under certain circumstances, pointing guns at people is in fact considered to be safe enough to justify doing so. I've already cited force on force training as an example: thousands of times per year, military service members point guns at each other. Jeff Cooper, father of the four rules, thought there were allowable exceptions. He took this photograph, with his pistol pointed at the cameraman and his finger on the trigger. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Combat_masters_A1.jpg/800px-Combat_masters_A1.jpg SAG thinks there are exceptions. The first rule in safety bulletin number 1 talks about doing so. Like I said, I know you want the four rules to apply everywhere, all the time, but professional firearms users disagree with you. Quoted: The NM manslaughter law says that manslaughter is any death caused "without due caution or circumspection." The dead body proves that there was not "due caution or circumspection." If a death was inherently proof that there was a lack of due caution and circumstance then you wouldn't need to say that manslaughter is a death that occurs due to a lack of due cation and circumstance. Are you familiar with the word "tautology"? Quoted: So, if you were in AB's place, you would have killed the woman and blamed someone else, even when you know that pointing guns at people is unsafe. Is that correct? Logic isn't your strong suit, is it? For that matter, any time you point a gun at the ground you're also pointing it towards someone in China |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 8:50:58 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So someone told him it was a real firearm loaded with real ammo, and he walked up and popped someone with it? Is that correct? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I was taught I can point cap guns and water piatols at people. If someone secretly tooled up my cap gun to fire a 22lr then I wouldn't feel responsible for shooting someone. I would blame the person who set up a fake gun to shoot real bullets. It wasn't a cap gun or a water pistol and AB knew it. He was told it wasn't. So, you are saying that you would have done the same thing AB did. Is that correct? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2023 9:09:43 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If I build a balcony on my house without regard to building codes, and it collapses and kills someone, is it my fault? Of course. What if I didn't want it to collapse, so I hire an engineer to design it, and a builder to build it? Would you consider that due caution and circumspection? What if the builder cheated on materials, and it falls and kills people? Would I go to prison for not finding out that the builder didn't follow the design? I took measures to make sure that no one got killed, and they got killed anyway. See how that works? In your hypothetical, you posit that you, as an individual, are incapable of the most rudimentary inspection, ans so, are absolved of all blame. So, let's follow that. You hire a reputable engineer and builder, but somebody cuts corners. You go out on your new balcony, and there are observable flaws. Big cracks, gaps, creaking and groaning when you put weight on it. Would you just shrug your shoulders and call it good? Or would you make these rudimentary observations and point out to the builder that something wasn't right? Note, I'm not saying the revolver was obviously defective. I'm saying a rudimentary inspection would have prevented the homicide (that was for the grammar nazis), just as a rudimentary inspection would have noted major flaws in your fictional balcony. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
