So let's see if he will be convicted of anything. There will be a lot of disappointed posters if he isn't.
He’s already been charged. You can’t even admit you were wrong on that account Time to move the goalposts. Lol
A charge isn't a conviction - far from it. But you aren't interested in what happens to Baldwin, only in what I say about it. You flatter me with your somewhat misplaced attention.
Baldwin is fricked. He’s going to need good lawyering (which he has) to get out of this. Based on Screen Actor’s Guild Safety Guidelines and Regulations, he violated a whole bunch of things.
- 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.
-These SAFETY BULLETINS are guidelines recommended by the Safety Committee. They are not binding laws or regulations. State, federal, and/or local regulations, where applicable, override these guidelines.
- Never Point a gun at someone, if you have to do it on camera, consult the Propmaster to ensure it is done safely. Assume any object you point the gun at could be destroyed.
Baldwin violated a bunch of industry guidelines. He also violated New Mexico law:
“Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. A. Voluntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed upon a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion. Whoever commits voluntary manslaughter is guilty of a third degree felony resulting in the death of a human being. B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.”
Baldwin was using a firearm on set (Lawful), he caused a death in an unlawful manner by pointing the gun at someone without taking the extra precautions of consulting with the propmaster or insisting the gun be checked again before proceeding.
He’s already been charged. You can’t even admit you were wrong on that account Time to move the goalposts. Lol
Dozens of examples for this.
At almost 80 years of age he is acting like during puberty.
A charge isn't a conviction. The latter isn't inevitable. But you are another obsessed what what I say and with no interest in the actual thread subject.
Since it's clearly of enormous importance to you, where exactly does it get you - or anyone here - that Baldwin has been re-charged with involuntary manslaughter? Every expert opinion has indicated the obstacles for the prosecution in obtaining a conviction are considerable - which has been my argument throughout.
I have no dog in this fight, but I really can't understand why you aren't capable of simply saying "Yes, I said he wouldn't be charged with anything, and I was wrong." Both of these things are plainly true at this point.
Everyone gets things wrong sometimes. Nothing to be ashamed of there. But it is truly bizarre to be unable to recognize that you were wrong after the fact once it has become obvious. You emphatically made a claim that has turned out to not hold up. Why can't you just say "yeah, I got that one wrong" and move on?
I spent most of my time arguing with morons who claimed he committed murder. That they are clearly wrong doesn't interest you? The case doesn't appear to interest you, only what I say about it. So what that he has been re-charged with involuntary manslaughter. It isn't an intentional killing - as I argued throughout - and it is the least serious offence in that category. There is also no guarantee that he will be convicted. Does any of that matter to you or only that I should fall on my sword?
That's a lie. And a very odd way to lie, referring to yourself in third person.
Why would you come back here and post the same lies that you were humiliated with multiple time? Here is short, incomplete list of Posts already addressing your lies (and lousy legal abilities):
Post # 1044 on page 53
Post # 1057 on page 53 (pointing out that you are lying about lying)
Post # 1023 on page 52
Here, YET AGAIN, are your ridiculous legal predictions regarding Baldwin's charges, complete with all the insults against people who accurately informed you that Baldwin indeed may be charged with manslaughter.
ARMSTRONGLIV: "Baldwin will not be charged with anything. Name the last time an actor was charged with careless use of a firearm while rehearsing on a film set, let alone anything more serious. This thread is for deluded uneducated fantasists. So many of you."
ARMSTRONGLIV: "It isn't your field of law - that explains it. Watch how Baldwin will not be charged with an offence. Crimes require intent. There was no intent. He was in a scene rehearsal. Negligence requires a failure to observe a duty of care. The negligence wasn't his. He was given a firearm that he was assured was not armed."
ARMSTRONGLIV: "Involuntary manslaughter requires that he was breaking the law when the death occurred. Practising part in a film role does not constitute an unlawful act. Yet another drongo who thinks he has a grasp of the law."
ARMSTRONGLIV: "You don't know what involuntary manslaughter is. It isn't simply a mistake but a killing that results from breaking the law. Baldwin pointing a gun (that was declared to be unloaded) in the course of acting a film role was not breaking any law - otherwise innumerable actors have been in breach of the law when acting a role. Nor was it criminal negligence unless it was obvious there was a real risk of serious injury."
ARMSTRONGLIV: "You have no idea what intent means as a legal principle. Nor do you understand what is legally reckless or negligent and nor do you grasp that there are no facts known so far to adduce either might apply. You are so far out of your depth I can hear bubbles."
OUCH. Armstronglivs just got owned.
The only person who appears to feel any pain is you.
Show me where I said he wouldn't be charged. I never said such a thing.
I’m not going to go back and look (at least right now), but I seem to recall you were pretty emphatic that Baldwin couldn’t be charged. Not as unreasonable, idiotic and insulting as Armstrong, but emphatic enough to look stupid now.
This is a terrible accident. I don’t think anyone seriously wants Baldwin in prison. But under American law when someone dies in a clearly preventable accident, there almost always be criminal prosecution. And what you continue to fail to appreciate is that a lot of people think it is reckless and criminal to point a gun at some and pull the trigger, no matter who or how many people told you the gun wasn’t loaded. I’d never in a million years do that, and neither would most people. Would you?
As difficult as it is to persuade you and those with views like yours, the legal consequences for Baldwin have nothing to do with what you guys think should happen. It is the facts and the law and what a court decides that will determine the outcome.
He’s already been charged. You can’t even admit you were wrong on that account Time to move the goalposts. Lol
A charge isn't a conviction - far from it. But you aren't interested in what happens to Baldwin, only in what I say about it. You flatter me with your somewhat misplaced attention.
But a charge is a charge. And that’s what we’re talking about that you got soooooooo wrong. You were so adamant that he wouldn’t be charged. You got it wrong pal. Hahahahaha
I have no dog in this fight, but I really can't understand why you aren't capable of simply saying "Yes, I said he wouldn't be charged with anything, and I was wrong." Both of these things are plainly true at this point.
Everyone gets things wrong sometimes. Nothing to be ashamed of there. But it is truly bizarre to be unable to recognize that you were wrong after the fact once it has become obvious. You emphatically made a claim that has turned out to not hold up. Why can't you just say "yeah, I got that one wrong" and move on?
I spent most of my time arguing with morons who claimed he committed murder. That they are clearly wrong doesn't interest you? The case doesn't appear to interest you, only what I say about it. So what that he has been re-charged with involuntary manslaughter. It isn't an intentional killing - as I argued throughout - and it is the least serious offence in that category. There is also no guarantee that he will be convicted. Does any of that matter to you or only that I should fall on my sword?
Personally, the only thing that matters to me is that this just piles on the existing evidence that you are an idiot. 50 some pages of you telling everyone they’re stupid for saying he’ll be charged. Guess what? He was charged. Hahahahahaha You were wrong….again. Hahahahaha
Baldwin is fricked. He’s going to need good lawyering (which he has) to get out of this. Based on Screen Actor’s Guild Safety Guidelines and Regulations, he violated a whole bunch of things.
- 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.
-These SAFETY BULLETINS are guidelines recommended by the Safety Committee. They are not binding laws or regulations. State, federal, and/or local regulations, where applicable, override these guidelines.
- Never Point a gun at someone, if you have to do it on camera, consult the Propmaster to ensure it is done safely. Assume any object you point the gun at could be destroyed.
Baldwin violated a bunch of industry guidelines. He also violated New Mexico law:
“Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. A. Voluntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed upon a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion. Whoever commits voluntary manslaughter is guilty of a third degree felony resulting in the death of a human being. B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.”
Baldwin was using a firearm on set (Lawful), he caused a death in an unlawful manner by pointing the gun at someone without taking the extra precautions of consulting with the propmaster or insisting the gun be checked again before proceeding.
The problem with your argument that he breached safety standards by "pointing the gun" at the person who died is that he will argue that he didn't point a gun at anyone. To point is to aim. That is an intentional act. None of the known facts support that.
Secondly, there was a safety process in place where the guns used as props were required to be checked by the armorer who would have then assured the director the gun was unloaded. The director then informed the set the gun was "cold" i.e safe. The question is whether that process met industry safety standards and Baldwin was entitled to rely on that assurance or whether he should have checked the gun himself. Even so, that might not be sufficient to establish gross negligence, which is the bar that the prosecution will have to meet. Gross negligence would probably need be established by showing there wasn't an adequate safety process in place, that Baldwin wasn't given an express assurance that the gun was safe and he used it recklessly on the set by pulling the trigger with a high likelihood of shooting someone if the gun was loaded. All of that is going to be difficult for the prosecution to prove.
A charge isn't a conviction - far from it. But you aren't interested in what happens to Baldwin, only in what I say about it. You flatter me with your somewhat misplaced attention.
But a charge is a charge. And that’s what we’re talking about that you got soooooooo wrong. You were so adamant that he wouldn’t be charged. You got it wrong pal. Hahahahaha
So if he was charged with jaywalking that would do it for you.
I spent most of my time arguing with morons who claimed he committed murder. That they are clearly wrong doesn't interest you? The case doesn't appear to interest you, only what I say about it. So what that he has been re-charged with involuntary manslaughter. It isn't an intentional killing - as I argued throughout - and it is the least serious offence in that category. There is also no guarantee that he will be convicted. Does any of that matter to you or only that I should fall on my sword?
Personally, the only thing that matters to me is that this just piles on the existing evidence that you are an idiot. 50 some pages of you telling everyone they’re stupid for saying he’ll be charged. Guess what? He was charged. Hahahahahaha You were wrong….again. Hahahahaha
So none of you are interested what happens to Baldwin, only in what I say about it.
Baldwin the actor? Likely not culpable. Baldwin the producer? Likely.
I think that this is the most likely outcome.
There seems to have been a lot of sloppiness on the set regarding gun and ammo use. There was supposed to be NO live ammo on the set, and yet there was a previous incident on the set with live ammo. And Baldwin the producer has at least some level of responsibility regarding that.
Probably what will happen is that Baldwin (the producer) will plead guilty to some minor offense that won't send him to jail. It's a win win. The prosecutor can say that Baldwin is guilty, and Baldwin avoids jail time.
And the thing about his culpability as a producer, big name actors with producer credits on small movies are producers in name only, attaching their names for clout and to help the actual producers attract financing and distribution. I’d bet dollars to donuts he had zero operational involvement in any level. A cautionary tale.
This post was edited 30 seconds after it was posted.
But a charge is a charge. And that’s what we’re talking about that you got soooooooo wrong. You were so adamant that he wouldn’t be charged. You got it wrong pal. Hahahahaha
So if he was charged with jaywalking that would do it for you.
Was he charged with jaywalking?
This is what you’re resorting to now. Hahahahahaha
Personally, the only thing that matters to me is that this just piles on the existing evidence that you are an idiot. 50 some pages of you telling everyone they’re stupid for saying he’ll be charged. Guess what? He was charged. Hahahahahaha You were wrong….again. Hahahahaha
So none of you are interested what happens to Baldwin, only in what I say about it.
I’m interested in many things. One of them is seeing you lie, squirm and make a fool of yourself. Btw, you’re doing a stellar job at all three. Hahahahahahaha
Baldwin is fricked. He’s going to need good lawyering (which he has) to get out of this. Based on Screen Actor’s Guild Safety Guidelines and Regulations, he violated a whole bunch of things.
- 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.
-These SAFETY BULLETINS are guidelines recommended by the Safety Committee. They are not binding laws or regulations. State, federal, and/or local regulations, where applicable, override these guidelines.
- Never Point a gun at someone, if you have to do it on camera, consult the Propmaster to ensure it is done safely. Assume any object you point the gun at could be destroyed.
Baldwin violated a bunch of industry guidelines. He also violated New Mexico law:
“Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. A. Voluntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed upon a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion. Whoever commits voluntary manslaughter is guilty of a third degree felony resulting in the death of a human being. B. Involuntary manslaughter consists of manslaughter committed in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to felony, or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death in an unlawful manner or without due caution and circumspection.”
Baldwin was using a firearm on set (Lawful), he caused a death in an unlawful manner by pointing the gun at someone without taking the extra precautions of consulting with the propmaster or insisting the gun be checked again before proceeding.
The problem with your argument that he breached safety standards by "pointing the gun" at the person who died is that he will argue that he didn't point a gun at anyone. To point is to aim. That is an intentional act. None of the known facts support that.
Secondly, there was a safety process in place where the guns used as props were required to be checked by the armorer who would have then assured the director the gun was unloaded. The director then informed the set the gun was "cold" i.e safe. The question is whether that process met industry safety standards and Baldwin was entitled to rely on that assurance or whether he should have checked the gun himself. Even so, that might not be sufficient to establish gross negligence, which is the bar that the prosecution will have to meet. Gross negligence would probably need be established by showing there wasn't an adequate safety process in place, that Baldwin wasn't given an express assurance that the gun was safe and he used it recklessly on the set by pulling the trigger with a high likelihood of shooting someone if the gun was loaded. All of that is going to be difficult for the prosecution to prove.
Ohhh boy. Talk about reaching and talking yourself into circles. Involuntary manslaughter can be an unintentional act where a death resulted because you did not exercise due caution. - there was no ricochet. Therefore, Baldwin had to be pointing the gun at the cinematographer. They were trying to get the money shot, so yes, it was an inherently dangerous act being done intentionally. If Baldwin didn’t point the gun at someone, no one would have died.
- if live rounds were not on set, the gun was loaded and checked correctly, and it wasn’t pointed at someone, no one would have died. The fact that someone died absent some freak accident shows that the procedures as practiced were not adequate.
Multiple people were charged because each had a portion of responsibility. Look at it this way, if Baldwin was instructed to point it at his head, do your think he would have insisted on an extra check? If you say yes, the mere fact that he didn’t insist on this shows he did not act with due care to the victim.
So none of you are interested what happens to Baldwin, only in what I say about it.
I’m interested in many things. One of them is seeing you lie, squirm and make a fool of yourself. Btw, you’re doing a stellar job at all three. Hahahahahahaha
You've established you're not interested in Baldwin. The only fool here is you and those who think - actually don't think - like you.
The problem with your argument that he breached safety standards by "pointing the gun" at the person who died is that he will argue that he didn't point a gun at anyone. To point is to aim. That is an intentional act. None of the known facts support that.
Secondly, there was a safety process in place where the guns used as props were required to be checked by the armorer who would have then assured the director the gun was unloaded. The director then informed the set the gun was "cold" i.e safe. The question is whether that process met industry safety standards and Baldwin was entitled to rely on that assurance or whether he should have checked the gun himself. Even so, that might not be sufficient to establish gross negligence, which is the bar that the prosecution will have to meet. Gross negligence would probably need be established by showing there wasn't an adequate safety process in place, that Baldwin wasn't given an express assurance that the gun was safe and he used it recklessly on the set by pulling the trigger with a high likelihood of shooting someone if the gun was loaded. All of that is going to be difficult for the prosecution to prove.
Ohhh boy. Talk about reaching and talking yourself into circles. Involuntary manslaughter can be an unintentional act where a death resulted because you did not exercise due caution. - there was no ricochet. Therefore, Baldwin had to be pointing the gun at the cinematographer. They were trying to get the money shot, so yes, it was an inherently dangerous act being done intentionally. If Baldwin didn’t point the gun at someone, no one would have died.
- if live rounds were not on set, the gun was loaded and checked correctly, and it wasn’t pointed at someone, no one would have died. The fact that someone died absent some freak accident shows that the procedures as practiced were not adequate.
Multiple people were charged because each had a portion of responsibility. Look at it this way, if Baldwin was instructed to point it at his head, do your think he would have insisted on an extra check? If you say yes, the mere fact that he didn’t insist on this shows he did not act with due care to the victim.
You don't understand what is an intentional and an unintentional act. Like most here you assume because someone was shot it had to be intentional. That isn't the case unless Baldwin deliberately aimed the gun at the victim - which is "pointing" it. Nothing we know about the case so far suggests he did. It is possible that a person can be shot simply because of the handling of a firearm that was loaded (even though it was believed to be unloaded in this case). That is what appeared to happen here.
This post was edited 8 minutes after it was posted.
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.