I'm only bringing it up because it's hilarious watching reddit, who freaks out any time a gun is fired, defend him at every turn.

Funny how quickly they go from "there's no such thing as a negligent discharge" to "Alec Baldwin is a saint :wojak-nooo: "

Reddit comments section: https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/xwbsu9/alec_baldwin_reaches_settlement_with_halyna/

  • CrimsonDynamo [he/him]
    hexagon
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    My thing with the "Alec the actors fault" thing is why are we eschewing normal gun safety rules just because there's a movie being filmed? The presence of cameras and the noble pursuit of the craft of acting™ don't magically make things different. It's standard practice to check a gun that someone hands you NO MATTER WHAT.

    Reddit type Libs cry that gun owners make the world unsafe when the overwhelming majority follow the normal safety guidelines. Rule number 1. Dont point a gun at anything you don't want to destroy. Rule number 2. ALWAYS check a gun handed to you. Why do actors get a pass just because someone is paid to do their thinking for them? Filming a movie doesn't suddenly make the consequences of your actions go away just because it was "someone else's job".

    "How many kids need to die because you want your penis substitute?" Crys the liberal

    How many people need to be killed or seriously hurt on movie sets for the sake of authentic looking weapons?

    Isn't this what libs scream anytime seone gets killed in a gun "accident"?

    • Ligma_Male [comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      just because there’s a movie being filmed?

      yes, actually. the chain of custody and trusting other people to do their jobs properly makes what should be a controlled environment like a movie set different from other circumstances where gun negligence occurs.

      don't hire scabs.

      • CrimsonDynamo [he/him]
        hexagon
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I agree with not hiring scabs, but I don't agree that gun safety should be ignored because you put your trust in someone else. If that's true, then that opens the door for a whole host of other potentially dangerous situations.

        What makes it different?

        :wojak-nooo: "gun nuts never follow rules and innocent people pay the price"

        Gun owners explaining that the rules weren't followed

        :so-true: "actually that's different"

        Is a bad take.

        • Ligma_Male [comrade/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          but I don’t agree that gun safety should be ignored because you put your trust in someone else

          not one person, multiple people including the union, but i can see i'm not going to convince you that your expectation of actors is out of line with the standards created by people who have thought about this way more than you or I have.

          • CrimsonDynamo [he/him]
            hexagon
            ·
            2 years ago

            It just doesn't negate the fact that people didn't personally follow the rules.

            I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here.