Cont: Baldwin fatally shoots crewmember on set of movie with prop gun (2)

[acbytesla]

Occam is snarling about the boatloads of unevidenced conditions you have to assume to make any of this explanation work.

Occam's razor says the simplest answer is usually right. Not always.

The question is it reasonable that his explanation is correct? Or isn't it?

 

[Thermal]

Occam's razor says the simplest answer is usually right. Not always.

Not quite. Occam says the explanation that requires the least amount of assumptions is probably better. My explanations assume very little, almost nothing. CC's assume widespread psychosis, inexplicable accidents, and *checks notes* apparently magic bullets and ninjas.

The question is it reasonable that his explanation is correct? Or isn't it?

No. Nor that it even could be, and certainly not entertainable as plausible unless a boatload of evidence was presented to support the wild speculation.

 

[acbytesla]

Not quite. Occam says the explanation that requires the least amount of assumptions is probably better. My explanations assume very little, almost nothing. CC's assume widespread psychosis, inexplicable accidents, and *checks notes* apparently magic bullets and ninjas.

This isn't my impression. I am fully convinced that that box of dummy rounds was supplied by Seth Kenney

No. Nor that it even could be, and certainly not entertainable as plausible unless a boatload of evidence was presented to support the wild speculation.

I'll let Chainsaw address that. He was persuasive to me.

 

[Thermal]

This isn't my impression. I am fully convinced that that box of dummy rounds was supplied by Seth Kenney

One box was provided by Kenney, per testimony. Three were distributed around the set, in gun belts and elsewhere, and live rounds were found there too. So this cockamamie theory about Seth mixing up bullets.. I guess it applies to others happening at the same time, too?

I'll let Chainsaw address that. He was persuasive to me.

Fair enough, bit he'll ignore the points and address something unrelated, if he responds.

Eta: "everything Hannah says is true, and everything Seth says is a lie" should hardly be a persuasive argument, man

 

[acbytesla]

One box was provided by Kenney, per testimony. Three were distributed around the set, in gun belts and elsewhere, and live rounds were found there too. So this cockamamie theory about Seth mixing up bullets.. I guess it applies to others happening at the same time, too?

I don't trust Seth Kenney's testimony. It is just as likely to be false and self serving. IMV

 

[Thermal]

I don't trust Seth Kenney's testimony. It is just as likely to be false and self serving. IMV

Dude. Hannah herself told investigators that two of the boxes labeled dummies were nabbed from her previous movie set, loose and repackaged, and that she herself grabbed them, not through Seth. Does that change your view at all about where the rounds might have come from? Still think it must have been Kenney that supplied them all? HG-R lied to investigators about it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/07/movies/rust-live-ammunition.html

 

[acbytesla]

Dude. Hannah herself told investigators that two of the boxes labeled dummies were nabbed from her previous movie set, loose and repackaged, and that she herself grabbed them, not through Seth. Does that change your view at all about where the rounds might have come from? Still think it must have been Kenney that supplied them all? HG-R lied to investigators about it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/07/movies/rust-live-ammunition.html

I do.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

My question is this. Is it possible for a live round to rattle at least a little? If the answer is yes, there is no way I could convict HGR. That's enough reasonable doubt for me.

It's been tested, a number 2 lead shot in a 45LC casing with 10 grains of instant coffee, instead of gun powder, you can't tell the difference between a live round that Rattles and a dummy round.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Dude. Hannah herself told investigators that two of the boxes labeled dummies were nabbed from her previous movie set, loose and repackaged, and that she herself grabbed them, not through Seth. Does that change your view at all about where the rounds might have come from? Still think it must have been Kenney that supplied them all? HG-R lied to investigators about it?

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/07/movies/rust-live-ammunition.html

The Previous movie she was working on was the old way they used no 45LC Chambered Rifles, Seth Kenny personally handled the Rifle Ammo on the Live shoot, on 1883. He admitted that in his own testomony.

 

[acbytesla]

It's been tested, a number 2 lead shot in a 45LC casing with 10 grains of instant coffee, instead of gun powder, you can't tell the difference between a live round that Rattles and a dummy round.

Then how can anyone argue that she didn't check and she was negligent BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT? Even if it is unlikely?

They can't go back and check that specific round. That's an impossibility.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

My Reply to Thermal's Questions.
"Random conspiracy theory. You keep.taking testimony at face value (like Hannah saying the live round rattled), but you randomly insist that Kenney is playing cloak and dagger, tampering with evidence and setting a perfect stage. That's not reasonable. Hannah is the only one that anyone has testified to tampering with evidence about (the baggie of coke she asked a friend to "hold")."

One Seth Kenneys own testomony has many times been inconsistent, and sometimes flat out lying. He also lost his fire Arm license because he had fully automatic weapons Improperly stored at PDQ.

Hannah was cleared of the Coke charges that was dismissed.

I take everyone's story with a grain of salt.

"Holdup. Why would dummy rounds have been in a tube mag? You can't see them on screen. And the dummies have bullet heads on them so they would look stupid being lever ejected."

Live rounds would gave been in the Tube Magazine, from the live shoot on 1883. Mistaken for dummy rounds when the guns were switched over to blanks, the Magazines have to be empty to load the blanks. There have been scenes in movies where dummy rounds were ejected as the gun was unloaded while being filmed.

"There is no reason whatsoever to assume such a round existed, or ever existed anywhere at any time for that matter.

Also, you kept insisting earlier that it was steel shot mixed into the powder. Lately you've suddenly been saying lead shot. Did you finally realize that the steel shot would have almost certainly scar the rifling in the barrel, which would have been discovered, so you switched to lead?"

SETH KENNEY'S testomony was that Joe Swanson, manufactured dummy rounds with No 2 lead shot, I realized that he said lead after reviewing the Court Testimony.

All that has to occur is for one mistake, one moment of Confusion on what is to be made and accidentally putting one No 2 lead shot into one of the bullets he was reloading.

"Doesn't explain how the trigger got depressed in the first place, or how a pinned back trigger wasn't noticed when the cylinder was inspected for rounds. If it wasn't pinned back when sitting on the tray, then Baldwin must have pulled it."

Depressing the trigger isn't Needed, if the hammer is down the Trigger is in the unengaged Pull position and can remain in the pulled position if Obstructed.

"Occam is snarling about the boatloads of unevidenced conditions you have to assume to make any of this explanation work."

Occasionally Occam is useless because layering of stupidity tends to lead to multiple mistakes ending one 1⃣ tragic event.
The whole causical chain might have been started by Joe Swanson reloading those rounds for Thell Reed.

 

[acbytesla]

Things are looking up for HGR.

The judge that oversaw the case against her and the case against Baldwin Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer, in an order issued on Wednesday, faulted prosecutors for “willful and deliberate misconduct” Lead special prosecutor Kari Morrissey, she found, not only repeatedly failed to fulfill discovery obligations but also gave “inconsistent” testimony related to the evidence she suppressed.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Then how can anyone argue that she didn't check and she was negligent BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT? Even if it is unlikely?

They can't go back and check that specific round. That's an impossibility.

You can't..

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Things are looking up for HGR.

The judge that oversaw the case against her and the case against Baldwin Judge Mary Marlowe Sommer, in an order issued on Wednesday, faulted prosecutors for “willful and deliberate misconduct” Lead special prosecutor Kari Morrissey, she found, not only repeatedly failed to fulfill discovery obligations but also gave “inconsistent” testimony related to the evidence she suppressed.

Yes it's clear the Prosecution was lying for the win.

 

[Thermal]

Then how can anyone argue that she didn't check and she was negligent BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT? Even if it is unlikely?

They can't go back and check that specific round. That's an impossibility.

Be skeptical for a moment. Ask CC about this "test", who performed it, etc.

Wanna bet he did the test himself during his morning constitutional?

What is reasonable about creating a round that has never ever not even once been found in the wild, that makes you consider it a reasonable doubt? If I posed that Flavor Flav was sucking on the casings and a diamond from.his grill fell in it, would that thar be reasonable? Cuz that's literally how likely it is that the Magic Bullet^TM was made.

 

[Thermal]

My Reply to Thermal's Questions.
"Random conspiracy theory. You keep.taking testimony at face value (like Hannah saying the live round rattled), but you randomly insist that Kenney is playing cloak and dagger, tampering with evidence and setting a perfect stage. That's not reasonable. Hannah is the only one that anyone has testified to tampering with evidence about (the baggie of coke she asked a friend to "hold")."

One Seth Kenneys own testomony has many times been inconsistent, and sometimes flat out lying.

So has Hannah's and Alex's. Yet you treat their words as if carved in tablets of gold, making wild excuses for them.

He also lost his fire Arm license because he had fully automatic weapons Improperly stored at PDQ.

Ad-homs are irrelevant to.loading a box of dummy rounds.

Hannah was cleared of the Coke charges that was dismissed.

It was dismissed. She was by no means "cleared". And again, that changes nothing. I said, clearly, that she was the only one accused of evidence tampering. She was. Seth was not.

I take everyone's story with a grain of salt.

"Holdup. Why would dummy rounds have been in a tube mag? You can't see them on screen. And the dummies have bullet heads on them so they would look stupid being lever ejected."

Live rounds would gave been in the Tube Magazine, from the live shoot on 1883. Mistaken for dummy rounds when the guns were switched over to blanks, the Magazines have to be empty to load the blanks. There have been scenes in movies where dummy rounds were ejected as the gun was unloaded while being filmed.

Was such a scene in that movie? If yes, you might have a point. If no, you are being deceptive. If you don't know, you're just making **** up.

And who exactly would pick up a rifle, start ejecting casings that were live and did not rattle, and think "aha! Must be dummies!" Let me randomly put them in this pile without checking them for Seth Kenney to individually clean and inspect and repackage in a box marked "dummy rounds".

"There is no reason whatsoever to assume such a round existed, or ever existed anywhere at any time for that matter.

Also, you kept insisting earlier that it was steel shot mixed into the powder. Lately you've suddenly been saying lead shot. Did you finally realize that the steel shot would have almost certainly scar the rifling in the barrel, which would have been discovered, so you switched to lead?"

SETH KENNEY'S testomony was that Joe Swanson, manufactured dummy rounds with No 2 lead shot, I realized that he said lead after reviewing the Court Testimony.

All that has to occur is for one mistake, one moment of Confusion on what is to be made and accidentally putting one No 2 lead shot into one of the bullets he was reloading.

And you know that "mistake" has virtually zero chance of happening, which is why such a Magic Bullet has never ever not even once been found, of the multiple millions of reloads made.

"Doesn't explain how the trigger got depressed in the first place, or how a pinned back trigger wasn't noticed when the cylinder was inspected for rounds. If it wasn't pinned back when sitting on the tray, then Baldwin must have pulled it."

Depressing the trigger isn't Needed, if the hammer is down the Trigger is in the unengaged Pull position and can remain in the pulled position if Obstructed.

That's what I'm saying. If it was in the pulled position, someone put it there before it ended up on the cart. Probably several.people saw or handled it with the trigger pinned back, inspecting the revolver close up, and no one noticed it? Your scenario relies on too many miracles, brah.

"Occam is snarling about the boatloads of unevidenced conditions you have to assume to make any of this explanation work."

Occasionally Occam is useless because layering of stupidity tends to lead to multiple mistakes ending one 1⃣ tragic event.
The whole causical chain might have been started by Joe Swanson reloading those rounds for Thell Reed.

Or by Flavor Flav sucking on casings. Pretty sure that's how it really went down.

 

[acbytesla]

Be skeptical for a moment. Ask CC about this "test", who performed it, etc.

Wanna bet he did the test himself during his morning constitutional?

What is reasonable about creating a round that has never ever not even once been found in the wild, that makes you consider it a reasonable doubt? If I posed that Flavor Flav was sucking on the casings and a diamond from.his grill fell in it, would that thar be reasonable? Cuz that's literally how likely it is that the Magic Bullet^TM was made.

You say that. But I don't know. And while I have firearms, I know next to nothing about ammo and even less about blanks and dummy rounds. CC appears to me to be someone who knows what he is talking about. I don't dismiss the idea that he has me fooled.

What I do know after seeing the interviews with Kenny is that I have the impression that Kenney is lying. I grant that I could be mistaken. But that is my impression.

 

[acbytesla]

He also lost his fire Arm license because he had fully automatic weapons Improperly stored at PDQ.

Ad-homs are irrelevant to.loading a box of dummy rounds.

You may argue that this was irrelevant. But that's not an ad hominem.

 

[acbytesla]

It was dismissed. She was by no means "cleared". And again, that changes nothing. I said, clearly, that she was the only one accused of evidence tampering. She was. Seth was not.

Also irrelevant. Seth Kenney had the lead investigator fooled on day one. Kenney had no business being as involved in the investigation as he was. He was treated as an expert by that woman instead of a potential suspect.

 

[Thermal]

You say that. But I don't know. And while I have firearms, I know next to nothing about ammo and even less about blanks and dummy rounds. CC appears to me to be someone who knows what he is talking about. I don't dismiss the idea that he has me fooled.

What I do know after seeing the interviews with Kenny is that I have the impression that Kenney is lying. I grant that I could be mistaken. But that is my impression.

I agree that Kenney is going out of his way to point the finger of blame away from himself, but I take that as a self centered CYA thing more than guilt. YMMV.

Regarding the reloads, CC is claiming that lead shot got mixed in with the gunpowder during a reloading session. That's loosely like making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich for your kids and spreading paint thinner on the bread. While you can kinda sorta say it's physically possible, it's not really. That's why not one single reported instance of such an occurrence exists.

CC is legitimately world building a scenario where G-R and Baldwin are telling the absolute truth, and it was just several.one in a billion flukes that made it come together. While that might be, all of them together are pretty preposterous...nay, extraordinary...and you know what they say about extraordinary things.

 

[Thermal]

You may argue that this was irrelevant. But that's not an ad hominem.

It's a textbook ad hom to imply that he must have tampered with evidence because he had an improperly stored firearm. Irrelevance is a solid part of an ad-hom.

 

[acbytesla]

I agree that Kenney is going out of his way to point the finger of blame away from himself, but I take that as a self centered CYA thing more than guilt. YMMV.

You say potato.

There is no way to know if it's general CYA or that he his specifically concerned that he is the source for the live rounds. Now is there?

I will repeat why IMV her guilt is not beyond a reasonable doubt. She may not be the source of the live ammo. And that the round may have had a rattle.

I refuse to incarcerate anyone for what I see to be a line of tiny accidents.

 

[Thermal]

You say potato.

There is no way to know if it's general CYA or that he his specifically concerned that he is the source for the live rounds. Now is there?

Exactly. And lacking the slightest hard evidence against him, I can't call his supposed guilt anything more than idle speculation. Jerky vibes are not evidence of guilt. A guy can be a defensive, throw-everybody-in-sight-under-the-bus douche and still have had no part in the actual problem.

I will repeat why IMV her guilt is not beyond a reasonable doubt. She may not be the source of the live ammo. And that the round may have had a rattle.

And I repeat: she was the source of the live ammo on that movie set. The contractual responsibility to procure and repeatedly check each round before use was hers and hers alone.

And no, the other live rounds on set didn't rattle, and they got right by her too. There's no need for a Magic Rattling Bullet theory when she was literally surrounded by live loads on her movie set.

I refuse to incarcerate anyone for what I see to be a line of tiny accidents.

No **** ups involving guns or bullets are tiny or accidental. Being careless with live rounds when you know full and well they are intended to go into a movie set is not a tiny ******* accident. Maybe I'm too careful with guns, I dunno. I have a lower body count than Alec, though, despite having shot a lot more. And a lower misfire count than Hannah, despite actively shooting before she was a twinkle in her daddy's eye.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I agree that Kenney is going out of his way to point the finger of blame away from himself, but I take that as a self centered CYA thing more than guilt. YMMV.

Regarding the reloads, CC is claiming that lead shot got mixed in with the gunpowder during a reloading session. That's loosely like making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich for your kids and spreading paint thinner on the bread. While you can kinda sorta say it's physically possible, it's not really. That's why not one single reported instance of such an occurrence exists.

CC is legitimately world building a scenario where G-R and Baldwin are telling the absolute truth, and it was just several.one in a billion flukes that made it come together. While that might be, all of them together are pretty preposterous...nay, extraordinary...and you know what they say about extraordinary things.

No I am giving them Reasonable Doubt, and looking at the only way their stories can be true, and if the stories can be true and the evidence like the Abrasions on the sear are pointing out that their stories might infact be true.
Why else would the prosecution hide the evidence?
E

 

[acbytesla]

Exactly. And lacking the slightest hard evidence against him, I can't call his supposed guilt anything more than idle speculation. Jerky vibes are not evidence of guilt. A guy can be a defensive, throw-everybody-in-sight-under-the-bus douche and still have had no part in the actual problem.

That may be true. But I don't need hard evidence of his guilt to believe his involvement in the investigation screwed this up. It doesn't have to be enough to convict him, but enough to offer reasonable doubt in her guilt. And IMV it is.

And I repeat: she was the source of the live ammo on that movie set. The contractual responsibility to procure and repeatedly check each round before use was hers and hers alone.

So what if she shook that round and it rattled? That was her contractual responsibility. There is a difference between that and criminal responsibility.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Exactly. And lacking the slightest hard evidence against him, I can't call his supposed guilt anything more than idle speculation. Jerky vibes are not evidence of guilt. A guy can be a defensive, throw-everybody-in-sight-under-the-bus douche and still have had no part in the actual problem.



And I repeat: she was the source of the live ammo on that movie set. The contractual responsibility to procure and repeatedly check each round before use was hers and hers alone.

And no, the other live rounds on set didn't rattle, and they got right by her too. There's no need for a Magic Rattling Bullet theory when she was literally surrounded by live loads on her movie set.



No **** ups involving guns or bullets are tiny or accidental. Being careless with live rounds when you know full and well they are intended to go into a movie set is not a tiny ******* accident. Maybe I'm too careful with guns, I dunno. I have a lower body count than Alec, though, despite having shot a lot more. And a lower misfire count than Hannah, despite actively shooting before she was a twinkle in her daddy's eye.

Seth Kenney's lied on the Witness stand and said Joe Swanson quit using Nickel primers because Winchester quit making them, and yet rounds turned up with Nickel primers in Trey Testiys possession from the Same batch of Reloads.

Sarah Threw away Rounds while on the phone with Seth Kenney, and was given a plea deal, Seth Kenney was given months to get rid of any Incriminating evidence and was shown by Hancock what he needed to get rid of.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Exactly. And lacking the slightest hard evidence against him, I can't call his supposed guilt anything more than idle speculation. Jerky vibes are not evidence of guilt. A guy can be a defensive, throw-everybody-in-sight-under-the-bus douche and still have had no part in the actual problem.



And I repeat: she was the source of the live ammo on that movie set. The contractual responsibility to procure and repeatedly check each round before use was hers and hers alone.

And no, the other live rounds on set didn't rattle, and they got right by her too. There's no need for a Magic Rattling Bullet theory when she was literally surrounded by live loads on her movie set.



No **** ups involving guns or bullets are tiny or accidental. Being careless with live rounds when you know full and well they are intended to go into a movie set is not a tiny ******* accident. Maybe I'm too careful with guns, I dunno. I have a lower body count than Alec, though, despite having shot a lot more. And a lower misfire count than Hannah, despite actively shooting before she was a twinkle in her daddy's eye.

Hannah wasn't the only one loading guns and leathers on that set, so was the prop Master Sarah Zachary. That's why Seth Kenney wanted her fired and why she was told to take less time cleaning the guns.

 

[Thermal]

Seth Kenney's lied on the Witness stand and said Joe Swanson quit using Nickel primers because Winchester quit making them,

That's not true. I watched that part of the testimony. Kenney says Swanson told him that. You do not know if that statement is true or false, so to say Kenney lied is a lie.

and yet rounds turned up with Nickel primers in Trey Testiys possession from the Same batch of Reloads.

I have no idea who Trey Testiys is, and neither does Google. Could you please post in the English language?

Sarah Threw away Rounds while on the phone with Seth Kenney, and was given a plea deal, Seth Kenney was given months to get rid of any Incriminating evidence and was shown by Hancock what he needed to get rid of.

You are still making up accusations of evidence tampering by Kenney with dead zero evidence. Show evidence or drop the libeling.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

That's not true. I watched that part of the testimony. Kenney says Swanson told him that. You do not know if that statement is true or false, so to say Kenney lied is a lie.



I have no idea who Trey Testiys is, and neither does Google. Could you please post in the English language?



You are still making up accusations of evidence tampering by Kenney with dead zero evidence. Show evidence or drop the libeling.

False Kenney Said Swanson mixed Brass and Nickel primers, and then said Swanson Quit using Nickel primers when Winchester stopped manufacturing them, but CCI and other companies still manufacture Nickel primers.
Kenney's testomony to police contradicts itself.

Kenney had motive and opportunity because he practically lead the investigation with Hancock, they were to close and never viewed Kenney as a suspect from the start giving him to much information.

However I do not think Kenney purposefully sabotaged the set, I think it was a mistake on 1883. That ultimately resulted in the Dummy rounds making their way onto the Rust set.

I think Kenney was just covering his behind.

 

[gabeygoat]

Prop gun, squib, lighting, camera angle, and editing to help sell the illusion. A sound effect in post. And never a real gun, never real bullets anywhere in the production, never a squib fired at close range towards anyone in the cast or crew. That's how I'd do it, if I didn't have the tech or the budget to do something more explicit.*

Moviemakers are well familiar with all the techniques of telling a story on screen, without actually showing what the budget or the technology will not allow. Any film school graduate can compose a scene in such a way that everything but the muzzle flash itself is shown, and every viewer comes away with the impression that they actually saw the gun fire. How many people could have sworn they saw a man's ear get cut off, on screen, in Reservoir Dogs?

This idea that filmmakers always try for the most physically accurate depictions possible is a laughable canard. There's tons of things on set that are obviously shallow, hollow fakes, that only look believable on camera, from a certain angle, with specific lighting. There's tons of things we see on screen that we know aren't realistic, but we accept them as real in the context of the story because they look believable in that context.

Top Gun didn't actually have Maverick fly an F-14 inverted over a MiG-28. The MiG-28 isn't even a real plane. But people still accept that's what they saw happen in that scene. Sam Raimi didn't give Tom Holland functional web shooters so that he could do real web-slinging travel among the skyscrapers of Manhattan. We all knew it was fake. It even looked fake a lot of the time. But we accepted it without question, because literal realism is not actually a highly valued thing in cinema. Never has been, never will be.

Filmmakers who go for literal realism are indulging a personal and unnecessary quirk, often to the detriment of the production. They're not upholding some general principle of good filmmaking. They're not even delivering what the viewers actually want.

---
*Speaking of explicit, if literal realism is so important, how come we never see people literally copulating on camera, in sex scenes? How come so many movies are able to believably convey the idea that two characters had sex, without even showing a simulated sex scene?

Ted: "Steve in this scene your character is going to drink poison."
Steve: "Cool, cool. So what I'm just going to drink water with food coloring or something?"
Ted: "Oh no that's not realistic enough. You're going to drink the actual poison, but don't worry we've watered it down so it's below the lethal dose, you'll be fine."
Steve: ".... is that safe?"
Ted: "Oh absolutely. Don't worry we have a trained chemist on set who's job it is to water down the poison."
Steve: "Oh... okay I guess that will work."
Ted: "Great. And ACTION!"
*Steve drinks the poison, and immediately keels over dead.*
Ted: "Oh crap. I guess our poison water downer was bad at their job."

Some People Here: "Well obviously the answer is to get better poison water downers."
Me: "Or we could just not use poison at all in any way so the 'process' for handling the poison doesn't matter."
Some People Here: "No that totally wouldn't look right on screen."

Word to this and a bunch of other posts from Joe and the prestige on this. Seems simple that not having real guns on set would be simpler, safer and cheaper.

 

[Shrinker]

Word to this and a bunch of other posts from Joe and the prestige on this. Seems simple that not having real guns on set would be simpler, safer and cheaper.

All these perspectives don't really take account of the business of filmmaking. When I asked an armourer about this a few years ago the answer was a lot more mundane that what gets put forward here.

It really isn't about achieving any particular fetishistic shot of a gun. Any shot can be faked. If there's a shot of somebody loading a gun, pointing it at someone and shooting them, it can be faked, even in a student movie. Everybody knows that, a little ingenuity is all it takes. One of the things folks here don't account for is that, the crew are not just getting a shot, they're trying to make a whole movie, with less time and money than they'd like. If there's guns throughout the movie, they can't plan every scene, they can't pause for ingenuity every time there's a new idea. They need a general, one-size-fits-all solution to their guns that they can use every day.

For the armourer, supplying guns to a movie set is a business, and a competitive one in a small industry. The challenge for the armourer is to provide a professional service, which means catering to a wide range of needs, anticipating improvisation, managing spikes in demand, supplying on time at short notice, and supplying high quality, close-up ready, functioning props. What he told me, and another later agreed with, is that the supply chain for replicas and deactivated weapons isn't robust enough and that it's quite simply easier to get real ones sometimes. What he added, is that it's not even viable to build a robust supply chain because the demand is so erratic.

What's quite frustrating while reading these threads is to see the industry dismissed as stupid, and all kinds of ideas put forward, but the industry was already doing all of them. Armourers can make plastic moulded replicas for BG artists quite quickly and easily. They do that a lot (from real guns). They use BB guns, which have been a godsend, because there's a great supply chain of those, especially for modern guns. They use movie-specific devices which can simulate gunfire without any propellant.

For the VFX solution, pretty much everyone who has commented here has it wrong. Producers, directors, ADs, actors, love the VFX solution because it makes the working days much faster. No reloads, no earplugs, no waiting for the smoke to clear between takes. But outside of certain easy scenarios it's still very expensive. HGR's pay for the entire movie would not cover the cost of unloading a six shooter in one scene. And you'd still have to pay HGR.

So while there's not a compelling single reason to use a real gun in any one scene, the safety aspect isn't really compelling enough to completely eliminate the last few guns from the industry. The last few guns are the hardest to get rid of, but also should be the easiest to manage. The negligence on the set of Rust was staggering. The safety protocols are really not difficult, any average person could have performed them. This is likely why we've not seen much in the way of an industry ban, even as we continue to see a dramatic reduction.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

All these perspectives don't really take account of the business of filmmaking. When I asked an armourer about this a few years ago the answer was a lot more mundane that what gets put forward here.

It really isn't about achieving any particular fetishistic shot of a gun. Any shot can be faked. If there's a shot of somebody loading a gun, pointing it at someone and shooting them, it can be faked, even in a student movie. Everybody knows that, a little ingenuity is all it takes. One of the things folks here don't account for is that, the crew are not just getting a shot, they're trying to make a whole movie, with less time and money than they'd like. If there's guns throughout the movie, they can't plan every scene, they can't pause for ingenuity every time there's a new idea. They need a general, one-size-fits-all solution to their guns that they can use every day.

For the armourer, supplying guns to a movie set is a business, and a competitive one in a small industry. The challenge for the armourer is to provide a professional service, which means catering to a wide range of needs, anticipating improvisation, managing spikes in demand, supplying on time at short notice, and supplying high quality, close-up ready, functioning props. What he told me, and another later agreed with, is that the supply chain for replicas and deactivated weapons isn't robust enough and that it's quite simply easier to get real ones sometimes. What he added, is that it's not even viable to build a robust supply chain because the demand is so erratic.

What's quite frustrating while reading these threads is to see the industry dismissed as stupid, and all kinds of ideas put forward, but the industry was already doing all of them. Armourers can make plastic moulded replicas for BG artists quite quickly and easily. They do that a lot (from real guns). They use BB guns, which have been a godsend, because there's a great supply chain of those, especially for modern guns. They use movie-specific devices which can simulate gunfire without any propellant.

For the VFX solution, pretty much everyone who has commented here has it wrong. Producers, directors, ADs, actors, love the VFX solution because it makes the working days much faster. No reloads, no earplugs, no waiting for the smoke to clear between takes. But outside of certain easy scenarios it's still very expensive. HGR's pay for the entire movie would not cover the cost of unloading a six shooter in one scene. And you'd still have to pay HGR.

So while there's not a compelling single reason to use a real gun in any one scene, the safety aspect isn't really compelling enough to completely eliminate the last few guns from the industry. The last few guns are the hardest to get rid of, but also should be the easiest to manage. The negligence on the set of Rust was staggering. The safety protocols are really not difficult, any average person could have performed them. This is likely why we've not seen much in the way of an industry ban, even as we continue to see a dramatic reduction.

A better solution would be using Mechanical scanning to take Human error out of the system and rapidly identify Live Rounds vs Dummy rounds, it could be done with a simple sensor and cell phone App.

 

[Shrinker]

A better solution would be using Mechanical scanning to take Human error out of the system and rapidly identify Live Rounds vs Dummy rounds, it could be done with a simple sensor and cell phone App.

HGR would have forgotten to use the app.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

HGR would have forgotten to use the app.

Make it so you cannot forget, that way no one does.

 

[acbytesla]

All these perspectives don't really take account of the business of filmmaking. When I asked an armourer about this a few years ago the answer was a lot more mundane that what gets put forward here.

It really isn't about achieving any particular fetishistic shot of a gun. Any shot can be faked. If there's a shot of somebody loading a gun, pointing it at someone and shooting them, it can be faked, even in a student movie. Everybody knows that, a little ingenuity is all it takes. One of the things folks here don't account for is that, the crew are not just getting a shot, they're trying to make a whole movie, with less time and money than they'd like. If there's guns throughout the movie, they can't plan every scene, they can't pause for ingenuity every time there's a new idea. They need a general, one-size-fits-all solution to their guns that they can use every day.

For the armourer, supplying guns to a movie set is a business, and a competitive one in a small industry. The challenge for the armourer is to provide a professional service, which means catering to a wide range of needs, anticipating improvisation, managing spikes in demand, supplying on time at short notice, and supplying high quality, close-up ready, functioning props. What he told me, and another later agreed with, is that the supply chain for replicas and deactivated weapons isn't robust enough and that it's quite simply easier to get real ones sometimes. What he added, is that it's not even viable to build a robust supply chain because the demand is so erratic.

What's quite frustrating while reading these threads is to see the industry dismissed as stupid, and all kinds of ideas put forward, but the industry was already doing all of them. Armourers can make plastic moulded replicas for BG artists quite quickly and easily. They do that a lot (from real guns). They use BB guns, which have been a godsend, because there's a great supply chain of those, especially for modern guns. They use movie-specific devices which can simulate gunfire without any propellant.

For the VFX solution, pretty much everyone who has commented here has it wrong. Producers, directors, ADs, actors, love the VFX solution because it makes the working days much faster. No reloads, no earplugs, no waiting for the smoke to clear between takes. But outside of certain easy scenarios it's still very expensive. HGR's pay for the entire movie would not cover the cost of unloading a six shooter in one scene. And you'd still have to pay HGR.

So while there's not a compelling single reason to use a real gun in any one scene, the safety aspect isn't really compelling enough to completely eliminate the last few guns from the industry. The last few guns are the hardest to get rid of, but also should be the easiest to manage. The negligence on the set of Rust was staggering. The safety protocols are really not difficult, any average person could have performed them. This is likely why we've not seen much in the way of an industry ban, even as we continue to see a dramatic reduction.

This.

I was trying to make this point before. But this post makes it so much better. Shrinker nails it. Anything given enough time and enough money can be faked. There is no application and market for fake guns outside of the film industry. It's simpler,faster and cheaper to use real ones than get some company to make something one off.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

This.

I was trying to make this point before. But this post makes it so much better. Shrinker nails it. Anything given enough time and enough money can be faked. There is no application and market for fake guns outside of the film industry. It's simpler,faster and cheaper to use real ones than get some company to make something one off.

The Problem was never with the guns it's always been with the gun powder that makes the gun go Boom, eliminate the gunpowder, and you eliminate the danger, that's what Dummy Rounds were supposed to do.

 

[acbytesla]

The Problem was never with the guns it's always been with the gun powder that makes the gun go Boom, eliminate the gunpowder, and you eliminate the danger, that's what Dummy Rounds were supposed to do.

That doesn't address the issue of live round being put into a functional firearm.

Take proper precautions, an accident like Rust shouldn't happen.

 

[smartcooky]

Word to this and a bunch of other posts from Joe and the prestige on this. Seems simple that not having real guns on set would be simpler, safer and cheaper.

There must surely be a company out there like "Blueguns" who make realistic guns the correct size and weight, with realistic recoil.

https://www.blueguns.com/

 

[Shrinker]

There must surely be a company out there like "Blueguns" who make realistic guns the correct size and weight, with realistic recoil.

https://www.blueguns.com/

Yes, every gadget suggested by anyone here is already in use, plus others not suggested by anyone here. Moulded lumps of plastic are used for background artists and stunt artists. The mechanical dummy, capable of recoil and case ejection is a component of the VFX solution to gunfire, similar to using BB guns. I believe the John Wick movies use such things exclusively.

But read my post above. Real guns aren't going to be eliminated overnight with a single technique because the problem isn't in front of the camera. It's the behind-the-scenes economics of supplying the entire industry's unpredictable needs using a small pool of custom gadgets, when there's ready access to factories full of the real thing.

This is getting addressed by an increasing unwillingness to have real or blank-firing guns, and increasing VFX accessibility. But complete elimination is very likely never going to happen without a ban and I'm not sure the industry yet feels the need of a ban and I don't think the unions are calling for it either.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

That doesn't address the issue of live round being put into a functional firearm.

Take proper precautions, an accident like Rust shouldn't happen.

Eliminate Human Error eliminate the problem, that's what a senor and Animation would do, scan a whole box of Dummy rounds without even opening the box. Scan every box before bringing it on set no exceptions.