Alec Baldwin WTF

[altasnob]

My guess is that this is mostly a small town prosecutor from a conservative area that's seeing an opportunity to make a name for themselves by going after one of the right's liberal boogeymen.

The prosecutor in charge of this case, Mary Carmack-Altwies, is a Democrat, former public defender, lesbian, married to former cop. Her district is Sante Fe, Los Alamos, and Rio Arriba counties. All three of these counties voted for Biden (as well as NM overwhelmingly so). Sante Fe and Los Alamos are the liberal capitals of NM.

Mary Carmack-Altwies has appointed special prosecutor Andrea Reeb, a Republican from a district just north of Roswell. But from my reading, Reeb just assisted in the investigation and charging decision. It's still Carmack-Altwies who is ultimately calling the shots. And it is unlikely Reeb would act as the trial attorney because she has a day job (state legislature).

[toast2266]

The prosecutor in charge of this case, Mary Carmack-Altwies, is a Democrat, former public defender, lesbian, married to former cop. Her district is Sante Fe, Los Alamos, and Rio Arriba counties. All three of these counties voted for Biden (as well as NM overwhelmingly so). Sante Fe and Los Alamos are the liberal capitals of NM.

Mary Carmack-Altwies has appointed special prosecutor Andrea Reeb, a Republican from a district just north of Roswell. But from my reading, Reeb just assisted in the investigation and charging decision. It's still Carmack-Altwies who is ultimately calling the shots. And it is unlikely Reeb would act as the trial attorney because she has a day job (state legislature).

Ha! OK, I guess my theory's out.

[The AD]

Just got my brakes done at Midas. There are better mechanics but Midas was cheaper.. Brakes failed and someone died because I couldn't stop. Midas clearly fucked up the front disk brakes. No one is disputing that. Authorities ask if I tried the emergency brake. I swear I did... FBI says I didn't and it was working fine according to their inspection. That's where we are here..

We're not. A gun is inherently different than a car.

[SumJongGuy]

Gun was supposed to be loaded with prop bullets that were supposed to LOOK REAL. The people who declared that to the the case declared it a cold gun and handed it to an actor who trusted them. Even if not, was he knowledgeable enough to know the difference between supposed to look real and actually real? What the fuck was he supposed to do, test fire the gun with the fake bullets?

Now if he laughed and pointed at people on his own making jokes that had nothing to do with the job at hand and BANG?? Ya maybe then there would be justifiable anger against what Baldwin did in that moment..

[mcski]

Pretty surprised too although I suppose it could still be part of a play for bigger political/cable channel aspirations. Baldwin is red meat for the fox crowd so going through the motions w him even if they lead no may have some longer term upside for her?

Still odd there hasn’t been any revelations as to how an actual bullet made it into the chamber of the gun

[bennymac]

Gun was supposed to be loaded with prop bullets that were supposed to LOOK REAL. The people who declared that to the the case declared it a cold gun and handed it to an actor who trusted them. Even if not, was he knowledgeable enough to know the difference between supposed to look real and actually real? What the fuck was he supposed to do, test fire the gun with the fake bullets?

Now if he laughed and pointed at people on his own making jokes that had nothing to do with the job at hand and BANG?? Ya maybe then there would be justifiable anger against what Baldwin did in that moment..

[Meadow Skipper]

My guess is that this is mostly a small town prosecutor from a conservative area that's seeing an opportunity to make a name for themselves by going after one of the right's liberal boogeymen.

Point of order: That’s not the case in Santa Fe County NM. Place is as blue as the sky.

Edit: nvm, altasnob got it.

[old goat]

The main thing I have gleaned in thinking about this discussion is that there sure are a hell of a lot of movies with a hell of a lot of guns. ( And as Chekhov said, if you show a gun in the first act someone better use it in the last.) Is Hollywood a bigger problem than the NRA? Even those of us who don't own guns, haven't fired one in many years, who want stronger gun laws, etc, etc, are fascinated by them. (Even those of us with big dicks.)

[altasnob]

Is Hollywood a bigger problem than the NRA? Even those of us who don't own guns, haven't fired one in many years, who want stronger gun laws, etc, etc, are fascinated by them. (Even those of us with big dicks.)

Humans just love guns. Even outside America. Look at the gun ranges in tourists places like West Yellowstone and Honolulu that are marketing to Asian tourists to come shoot guns like in the movies.

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

Those "Shoot a machine gun today!!!" places in Las Vegas are seriously scary.

[Core Shot]

Those "Shoot a machine gun today!!!" places in Las Vegas are seriously scary.

Fuck that shit. As much as I would like to someday shoot full auto AR or mac 10 or AK. I would not feel safe in that kind of a range.
Obviously there’s a range officer. But that insanity is insane.

[SumJongGuy]

We're not. A gun is inherently different than a car.

Are they really?

So you're saying everyone and anyone should be more careful with a gun than they are with a car? And it's OK to be more carless with a car than it is with a gun?

Gonna disagree here.. especially when the present situation involves expert oversight and expected levels of safety that go along with that.

Even if you believe it is different.. that's why the expert professional folks were there to handle, prep
are, inspect and instruct and supervise the actor using said gun.. Inherently different? OK additional precautions present..

[The AD]

Are they really?

So you're saying everyone and anyone should be more careful with a gun than they are with a car? And it's OK to be more carless with a car than it is with a gun?

That's what I'm saying, yes.

[AK47bp]

Are they really?

So you're saying everyone and anyone should be more careful with a gun than they are with a car? And it's OK to be more carless with a car than it is with a gun?

Gonna disagree here.. especially when the present situation involves expert oversight and expected levels of safety that go along with that.

Even if you believe it is different.. that's why the expert professional folks were there to handle, prep
are, inspect and instruct and supervise the actor using said gun.. Inherently different? OK additional precautions present..

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Adolf Allerbush]

That's what I'm saying, yes.

Cars are used as weapons relatively frequently, unfortunately...Berlin a few years back, i recall an pro-life rally had some nutter run over some folks at the rally, etc.

Both should be treated equally from a safety standpoint.

[The AD]

Cars are used as weapons relatively frequently

Yes, and guns are always weapons. I don't understand why that distinction is not clear. A car on a set isn't particularly dangerous in and of it itself. A gun is.

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

Well, there was this Town Car that the commercial production company rented for the ad agency that ended up going through a barbed wire fence late one night due to some extra curricular activities with the P.A.'s

[toast2266]

Yes, and guns are always weapons. I don't understand why that distinction is not clear. A car on a set isn't particularly dangerous in and of it itself. A gun is.

Well, you know how it goes. A couple crew members are screwing around with the car and they put some high octane race gas in it. Then the next day, Alec Baldwin's shooting a scene with that same car. He *thinks* it's got regular gas in it, but the crew forgot to switch the gas out. Next thing you know, he steps on the gas and mows a bunch of people down.

[SumJongGuy]

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Sure but did Baldwin shoot it yet?

[SumJongGuy]

Yes, and guns are always weapons. I don't understand why that distinction is not clear. A car on a set isn't particularly dangerous in and of it itself. A gun is.

Actually you're completely wrong here. Guns, on their own are NOT dangerous at all. It's the BULLETS that are dangerous.. No bullets, no danger.. Even without a gun, a bullet can be very dangerous..

[Adolf Allerbush]

Actually you're completely wrong here. Guns, on their own are NOT dangerous at all. It's the BULLETS that are dangerous.. No bullets, no danger.. Even without a gun, a bullet can be very dangerous..

I fully understand what The AD is saying...just pointing out that cars are pretty dangerous, especially if the intent is to do harm.

Guns are not always weapons...get this, often times in films they're props!

I'm sure there are all sorts of safety protocols for film production around use of cars. Doesn't seem like this is a hill worth dying on, so I'll just leave it at that.

[Meadow Skipper]

Some of you guys are still paying attention to SJG? Because…?

[lowsparkco]

I think some of you guys are misunderstanding that a big part of Baldwin’s responsibility is due to being a Producer of the film. So, not only did he pull the trigger, but he also hired the armorer who gave him the loaded gun. Lots of other pros on the film say the set was absolute chaos, so theoretically the armorer wasn’t given the tools or environment to do her job properly.

I doubt it will stick, but it does change the scenario vs. he was just an actor given a dangerous prop. He was also the Producer who hired the armorer who negligently gave an actor a deadly prop.

[SumJongGuy]

I think some of you guys are misunderstanding that a big part of Baldwin’s responsibility is due to being a Producer of the film. So, not only did he pull the trigger, but he also hired the armorer who gave him the loaded gun. Lots of other pros on the film say the set was absolute chaos, so theoretically the armorer wasn’t given the tools or environment to do her job properly.

I doubt it will stick, but it does change the scenario vs. he was just an actor given a dangerous prop. He was also the Producer who hired the armorer who negligently gave an actor a deadly prop.

Someone else pointed out there are 6+ other producers on that film who hired and managed the staff. Are they all just as liable as Baldwin as a producer? Why haven't they also been charged?

It would be interesting to see if they offer Baldwin the same deal they offered the guy who handed him loaded gun and said "cold gun".....

[Dantheman]

The main thing I have gleaned in thinking about this discussion is that there sure are a hell of a lot of movies with a hell of a lot of guns. ( And as Chekhov said, if you show a gun in the first act someone better use it in the last.) Is Hollywood a bigger problem than the NRA? Even those of us who don't own guns, haven't fired one in many years, who want stronger gun laws, etc, etc, are fascinated by them. (Even those of us with big dicks.)

https://youtu.be/Ebg2YnBj9II