Alec Baldwin WTF

[XXX-er]

Its obvious to me they should go after the armorer

who would then go postal/ kill some people

cuz its america

So they make a movie about it

[jono]

AB did say he never pulled the trigger - which a lot of “experts” then said wasn’t possible.

I guess you can't make it as an expert without proclaiming certainty these days, but the implicit assertion that personal experience > first hand knowledge got pretty strong on this.

I'm curious how many of those "experts" have any experience analyzing mechanisms that failed in unexpected ways. The armorer's trial should give them all another bite at the apple.

[CarlMega]

I'm curious how many of those "experts" have any experience analyzing mechanisms that failed in unexpected ways.

I'm sure this will be followed by an avalanche of people correcting their record on the haste in which they drew conclusions and then a promise to be patient while examining future evidence; no doubt we'll be deafened by the chorus of people going: "truth be told, I don't know the first thing about antique firearms, how they wear and can fail plus I never examined this weapon so it'd be reckless to pass my speculation as fact".

[mcski]

I guess you can't make it as an expert without proclaiming certainty these days.

you can’t. By definition, not just the press but people in general want/expect experts to be certain. there’s no room on the news for grey area nuances and for the most part that’s what people want.

Nearly every expert expressing certainty is most likely not the best person to get your information

[XXX-er]

in a country with > 400 million gun owners isnt everyone is an exspurt ?

[jono]

you can’t. By definition, not just the press but people in general want/expect experts to be certain. there’s no room on the news for grey area nuances and for the most part that’s what people want.

Nearly every expert expressing certainty is most likely not the best person to get information

Gotta keep the gold fishes' interest. Easier while being creatively wrong than right. It seems like they could manage it without saying "impossible" so much, though.

in a country with > 400 million gun owners isnt everyone is an exspurt ?

You of all people should know never to trust the end loser.

[SumJongGuy]

Didn't Hutchin's husband sue Baldwin in the wake of the FBI analysis? I wonder if that's still in progress.. Previously it to that they were still friends and talking it out.

[TBS]

in a country with > 400 million gun owners isnt everyone is an exspurt ?

FWIW only about 140 million Americans own 400 million guns.

[XXX-er]

well then with multiple gun ownership those 140 million would be really good

right in this thread we have already seen some of them exspurts school us on the gun ownership eh

[Garbowski]

AB did say he never pulled the trigger - which a lot of “experts” then said wasn’t possible.

The very same gun literally went off accidentally without pulling the trigger while it was being tested by the FBI. They also got it to go off another way without pulling the trigger.

Here's the actual report.
https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...ports-aug-2022

But yes, the geniuses are right and revolvers are designed to not shoot at random.

[jono]

The very same gun literally went off accidentally without pulling the trigger while it was being tested by the FBI. They also got it to go off another way without pulling the trigger.

Here's the actual report.
https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...ports-aug-2022

But yes, the geniuses are right and revolvers are designed to not shoot at random.

Thanks for the link. Are you talking about the last paragraph of Ziegler's 4th page? Am I missing something, or is that a grade A Shitshow, too? Reminds me of auvgeek's binding mount.

If I'm reading it right, they broke the gun while performing the one test most likely to damage it (hitting it with a rawhide hammer) and just continued on with the tests. Then when the gun subsequently malfunctioned he said: "This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the firearm or safety mechanism."

So many questions for the nation's premier crime lab:

Why would they possibly decide to do the tests in that order instead of checking all normal functions first?

Did they discover the damage only after the gun discharged in the later test--in which case how do they know when it was damaged? Or did they know it was damaged and continue to test it anyway, hoping to find or prove what, exactly?

WTF indeed.

One redeeming portion:

"When an accidental discharge examination is performed, 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."

[leroy jenkins]

Its not really relevant to this exact model and this exact situation, but old west type guns have all sorts of safety issues people aren't really aware of.

There are documented cases of lever guns with tube magazines having accidental discharges, the nose of one round in a tube magazine setting off the primer of the round in front of it, which then of course fires that round into the round in front of it. This was thought to only happen with non recessed primers and not flat nosed bullets, but that isn't accurate, its happened with flat nosed bullets with recessed primers.

Back in the day, the failure rate for catastrophic kabooms with the venerable walker colt and dragoon revolvers were abysmal. The numbers are thought to have been fudged just a bit by rangers and soldiers who embezzled their guns and lied about it but still, over half the walker colts were listed as destroyed or returned to the company.

Then theres the revolver carbines, which look super cool and seem practical, but the reason they weren't more popular is because they too had unacceptably high rates of catastrophic kabooms. This was obviously especially bad when instead of held at arms length as a handgun, they were held up next to the face as a carbine with a stock.

I'm pretty sure this type of revolver has been known to have accidental (not negligent) discharges. Still though, even if it's historically accurate and looks cool on screen, you'd think they'd have modern internals inside the thing with multiple internal mechanical safeties.

No real point one way or the other re Baldwin, not really my business, but I do think the less than stellar safety of the old west guns is pretty interesting. I'm sure there are other examples I am not remembering or aware of.

[SumJongGuy]

Baldwin said they told him to pull back the hammer and then told him to release it.. He said the gun fired when the hammer sprung back in to place. Also that he was asking them to confirm it was OK to release the hammer like that. I can see an old worn revolver failing like that.

[mcski]

Still wondering how an actual bullet ended up in the gun.

[riser4]

Still wondering how an actual bullet ended up in the gun.

Ya. Regardless of whether or not the gun could fire without touching the trigger, why was there a real round in it?

[SumJongGuy]

^^This is why the armourer is probably still going down.

[TNKen]

Read the bottom of page 4 of the report. The gun would not fire without pulling the trigger.

During the testing, the FBI struck the hammer and "fractured" i.e. broke the trigger sear and cylinder stop which then allowed the hammer to fall and detonate the primer. "This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the firearm or safety mechanisms."

[jono]

Scroll up.

"Was attributed to" is expert-speak for "I don't know." That the guy managed to write up a final report on his activities while leaving the desperately begged questions above unanswered should have you weeping for the fate of our nation after the death of rigor. Heaven help the prosecutor who takes that pile of crap into court.

[CarlMega]

Read the bottom of page 4 of the report. The gun would not fire without pulling the trigger.

Sounds like you should press charges, present your case. Oh wait.

[leroy jenkins]

Still wondering how an actual bullet ended up in the gun.

Or on set. Similar to if you're doing dry fire/reload practice you shouldn't even have live ammo in the room, I can't see what place live ammo has on a movie set.

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

Live ammo on set and in the gun, broken chain of custody, shitty armorer, none of that matters... Baldwin pulled the trigger so he's at fault. /s

[californiagrown]

Or on set. Similar to if you're doing dry fire/reload practice you shouldn't even have live ammo in the room, I can't see what place live ammo has on a movie set.

Isnt the story that the cast was using set guns to go plinking in the desert during their free time?

[riser4]

Live ammo on set and in the gun, broken chain of custody, shitty armorer, none of that matters... Ken doesn't like Baldwin so he's at fault.

Fifu

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

Isnt the story that the cast was using set guns to go plinking in the desert during their free time?

What could go wrong?

[SumJongGuy]

Read the bottom of page 4 of the report. The gun would not fire without pulling the trigger.

During the testing, the FBI struck the hammer and "fractured" i.e. broke the trigger sear and cylinder stop which then allowed the hammer to fall and detonate the primer. "This was the only successful discharge during this testing and it was attributed to the fracture of internal components, not the failure of the firearm or safety mechanisms."

That says it fired because shit was broken, not because the safety mechanisms failed or that the gun was working normally. It went off because the components are/were broken.