Indians For Guns

It has made news headlines: famous actor Alec Baldwin has killed a member of a film crew and wounded another on set while filming a movie. Apparently, one of the "prop" guns was handed to him and he was told that the gun was "cold" or unloaded.

Here, we see that Alec Baldwin, despite profuse apologies and "feeling bad" about the death of a movie crew coworker, has violated one of the most important and well-known safety rules: he was pointing a gun at people and he had not ensured that the gun was safe by checking it himself. Therefore, he is responsible for the death of the movie crew member. He had the gun, and he shot her. Period.

Also, I will add to the hypocrisy of Alec Baldwin, as he is outspoken in his opposition to private gun ownership and personal gun rights, yet he makes his living with guns. Also, while being a self-appointed "expert" on guns and their "evil" presence in society, he has just displayed his own shocking lack of responsibility and shown his "expertise" on what is bad for society: While guns are not unsafe in any society, Alec Baldwin, famous and self-important in saying how others should live, is himself a negligent killer of a human being.

I submit to you that guns are not unsafe, but Alec Baldwin and people like him are.

Still, lest we here at Indians for Guns should grow smug and judgmental, this sad incident should serve as a reminder to us all: WE are EACH responsible for our own safety and for the safety of those around us when we choose to pick up a gun of any kind. We MUST ALWAYS handle all guns, whether loaded, unloaded, or "unloaded," responsibly.

May we all enjoy firearms responsibly.

May the departed soul Rest in peace!
But how and why did a live round get on a movie set?! If a film crew (atleast in India) is granted permission to use blank rounds or blank firing guns for films, they are in no way permitted to use or carry live ammunition. I think there is more to the Alec Baldwin incident than what meets the eye.

Also now a huge ‘anti-gun’ rant can be expected across the US once again.

timmy.

To state in simple terms.......

"WE are EACH responsible for our own safety and for the safety of those around us when we choose to pick up a gun of any kind. We MUST ALWAYS handle all guns, whether loaded, unloaded, or "unloaded," responsibly."

This is something I always keep in mind and also taught my wife and daughter. They too are trained in handling firearms but do not own any firearms. They went through the Civilian Rifle Training Course at our state range and got certified. Though not necessary, I wanted them to be trained since I own firearms.

There are only four universal rules of gun safety . When more than one is breached , disaster is not far away.

1- All guns are always loaded
2- Don't point the muzzle at anything you don't want to dedtroy
3- Keep the fingers off the trigger until sights on the target - on the target on the trigger , off the target off the trigger
4 - Be sure of your target and BACKSTOP

A gun accident NEVER , NEVER happens unless at least two of these rules are breached .

A fifth rule I av found myself is - be sure to mechanically follow above rules howsoever long your gun carrying experience may have been .

Years ago and as a fortune I found this video wherein Clint Smith is talking gun safety . In the many years there have been two occurrences where owing to carelessness I breached one of these rules but no one got hurt just because not more than one rule was broken.

Clint Smith on gun safety ---

A similar incident happened near my place , a few days ago -- https://www.freepressjournal.in/bhopal/ ... -associate

ALARMING !!!!!

These incidents teach us to always consider any Gun to be loaded at all times , irrespective whether it's in One's own hand or anyone around us.

Crazy

Very unfortunate because all 1 needs is under 10-15 seconds to check yourself if a weapon is loaded or not and the safety. Last but not the least, why point the weapon in a direction you don't intend to fire upon.

Doesn't matter what the person said while giving it to you. This is literally a question of life and death and you can't be negligent about it.

Double check always even an airgun for that matter.

when in doubt, check it out!

@KSRA, we got CRTC certificate and Mr. Antony a.k.a Tony who walked us through the rules always first said, "treat all the guns loaded all the time".

Feel bad for the family who lost a member.

An utterly avoidable tragedy precipitated by criminal negligence.

The most foolproof safety for any fire arm is built between the ears.

Marksman

The way I look at this is like driving a car:

1. If you are driving, and your passenger is looking the other way at a busy intersection and tells you to go because the way is clear, and it is not and you hit someone, who is culpable? Is this the passenger's fault who told you to go because the way was clear? No, it is your fault, because you are in control of the car. That you delegated the responsibility to look the other way at the intersection doesn't clear you of your responsibility as the driver. You have control of the steering wheel, the accelerator pedal, and the brake pedal. You are responsible.

2. You are at the bar drinking. You become inebriated and drive home, get into an accident, and kill someone. Who is responsible? Is the alcoholic beverage company who made what you were drinking? Is the bartender who served you? Or are you, who chose to drink, chose to drive inebriated (even though you know that drinking clouds good judgement), and was in control of the auto? You are.

There are some places that now have laws that hold bartenders culpable for "over serving" an inebriated drunk driver who gets into an accident, agreed, but to my knowledge, this does not clear the drunken driver of their responsibility for causing an accident.

I say, if Baldwin or anyone else delegated responsibility to some set worker to care for and check firearms, that is their decision. It does not and cannot absolve them of responsibility because Baldwin and Baldwin alone had the gun when the crime was committed, and he had control of it, including the trigger. If he chose to have someone else check the firearm and chose to rely on that person's competence, that was his decision. His decision to pick up a gun, and his decision to aim the gun, and his decision to pull the trigger on a gun he did not check is solely his.

All of this talk about other things, like who was supposed to check the firearm and whatever process was implemented on the set is only a confusion meant to absolve him of culpability. Authorities will probably let him off from any real penalty because he is famous, because of public sentiment, or because they don't want to discourage other movie companies from coming to New Mexico to make films -- an important consideration in a poor state.

I do think he should be charged, as I do think he's guilty of that woman's sad death.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go ... d=81491305

The gun killed on its own. An example of how evil they are.

It is next to impossible to imagine that a veteran actor like Baldwin, living in a country where owing a gun is second nature, having featured in so many films and TV shows, would have carelessly handled a gun, be it real, dummy or replica pointing it at someone with his finger on the trigger, much less pull it.

Any news if he was prosecuted for the act ?

No, but yesterday the news came out where he said that he did not pull the trigger. Of course, there were witnesses. But I take this as the preliminary efforts to prove that the person who cared for the arms and/or the gun manufacturer is guilty for giving him a faulty gun.

I cannot express my total disgust and loathing for Baldwin. He is truly a low cur.

I hope that he's found guilty of something. The law will do very little to him, but the civil lawsuits that follow will extract some justice.

Apparently, the police are still investigating the live ammunition and think that they have found some leads.

New Mexico is a poor state and I expect that authorities will proceed carefully, as the income from using the movie set ranch for filming is undoubtedly a significant source of money for the state economy.

Things like this, are terrible and just add to the Anti-Gun sentiment in the U.S.

Bob