Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by johndoughy 1701 days ago
It should be standard practice for the operator of a firearm to check whether it's loaded with blanks or live rounds. Pushing that responsibility off to an 'armorer' invites situations like this.
4 comments

Given the amount of protocol breaks here, "it should be standard practice" is a bit pointless to talk about. "Standard practice" has multiple parts to ensure this never happens even if one step fails, so clearly it was massively ignored here. (And that's something an experienced actor like Baldwin arguably should've noticed as a problem)

(And probably the actual protocol of "armorer handles gun and shows what's being done" is safer if you ever involve blanks than having an untrained actor fiddle with a gun)

In this case, an assistant director handed the gun to Baldwin. I would expect that no one should hand a gun to an actor but the armorer and that armorer should open the gun and show the actor whether it is empty or loaded every time they are handed a gun, not laid on a table for anyone to pick up (see article below). Every gun should also be immediately retrieved and locked up following filming by that armorer. And in the case of blocking (setting up camera shots) no operational gun should ever be used, which is what happened in this case.

https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2021/10/23/who-is-hannah-gutierre...

Every gun is a loaded gun and don't point it at something you don't intend to destroy.
From the article, it doesn't appear as though Baldwin pointed and fired. It looks like the gun discharged when he removed it from the holster.

"Baldwin removed the gun from its holster once without incident, but the second time he did so, ammunition flew toward the trio around the monitor."

I don't think there are ever any live rounds on set
It's mentioned near the bottom of the article, but blanks seem to be considered "live rounds". Do we actually know if it was a real bullet or just a blank? I can't think of any reasons you would use real bullets on set.
How can a blank injure people at a distance?
Blanks typically contain wadding to hold the powder in place; this wadding is ejected from the gun and can, at short range, kill people. This has famously happened on several film sets before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blank_(cartridge)#Safety
yes, but that is not the case here. Even if the gun was right next to the target when it went off, a blank would not penetrate the body, go through it, and enter another person like it did here. 2 people were stuck with this single "blank." Only something with the mass of a bullet can do that (unless there was a serious manufacturing defect, which is highly unlikely). I believe that is also where the term "point blank range" came from. A blank is generally not lethal unless it is fired at extremely close range, such as holding it to your head, like in the examples in that wikipedia article if you research the individual incidents.
Depending on the mode of shooting blanks, there is still a significant amount of pressure generated due to the gunpowder in the round. Therefore, anything in the barrel, including a weak blank-firing adaptor (which Hollywood appears not to use) could be ejected at a high velocity. This could eject through the blank firing adaptor also, breaking it off and turning it likewise into a projectile.

Military rifles fitted with blank adaptors are known unsafe at close distances.

There is no way a wadding can go through one person and into another. Something else must have been inside that gun that turned into a projectile.
Any cleaning component left inside a firearm such as a cleaning rod, or metal bore brush, or debris from a previous round, could be ejected as a projectile from a blank fire. Additionally, gunpowder is really an explosive, so parts of the weapon can break and be ejected. I think this is more likely to happen with an older weapon, or a weapon firing high power rounds [1]

Suspect that Hollywood doesn't use blank firing adaptors like the US military which leads to a much more dangerous situation. Believe they do this for realism.

In the US military we'd take a number of steps to avoid these kind of mishaps.

safe weapon clearing procedures & intentional firing of weapon into sandbagged areas for hazardous conditions

Lots of Training about weapon safety

Team Leaders inspect fire teams

Squad Leaders inspect Squads

Platoon sergeants & LTs inspect platoons

Range Safety controls the whole show and may conduct their own inspections

Inspections include both weapons, magazines, and ammo pouches.

Our exercises never mix blanks with MILES gear, and actual live-fire exercises.

We don't fire weapons towards people at close range unless during warfare.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1449kJKxlMQ

As others have said, there's still a lot of energy leaving the muzzle. Other than that, a freak casing bounce?