When 63-year-old actor Alec Baldwin rehearsed a cross-draw from a holster on the Santa Fe, New Mexico set of the low budget film “Rust” Oct. 22, he inadvertently shot –and-killed cinematographer Halnya Hutchins, there was plenty of blame to go around. Baldwin, and his assistant director David Hallis, insist that the prop gun was “cold,” meaning it had no live rounds in the chamber, pointing fingers at the film’s “armorer” Hanna Gutierrez Reed, who placed the gun on a cart, apparently clearing the weapon for use on the set. Hallis removed the gun from the car, then handed it to Baldwin to use rehearsing how to cross-draw the six-shooter, pistol. While Baldwin remains inconsolable for killing Hutchins, there’s been plenty of blame to go around, leaving Santa Fe County Sheriff flummoxed over whom, if anyone, would be charged with a crime.
In a new twist on the story, unnamed crew members speculated that the “prop gun” might have been used earlier in the day for “pinking,” a hobby of shooting beer cans obviously live ammo. Whether that was true or not, the revolver, six-shooter, has a revolving chamber with ammunition fully exposed. Suggesting that a single live-round would have been stuck in the chamber, seems unlikely, with the revolver more likely filled with all six rounds. If there were only one live round in the chamber, there would be a 14.28% chance of a bullet discharged from the chamber. At the same time, Baldwin, who apparently practiced a cross-draw, pulled the trigger, claiming he thought the gun was “cold,” meaning no live rounds. But like anyone handling a firearm, the responsibility lies with the one pulling the trigger. Blaming his “armorer” or assistant director seems preposterous.
Once a gun handler points, pulls-the-trigger and discharges a firearm, the accountability remains with the person who pulled the trigger. When it comes to the Second Amendment, and all the rules-practices regarding firearm safety, it’s not enough to blame anyone who had prior use of a firearm. Whether the prop gun handed to Baldwin was used for target practice earlier in the day, the responsibility lies with the gun handler to determine that no live rounds or blanks were in the gun. When it comes to a revolver, a simple visual inspection would have told Baldwin what was in the cylinder or chamber. Had he just looked, he would have determined easily the number of live rounds or blanks left in the chamber or cylinder. Unlike semiautomatic handguns, bullets are visibly accessible, letting any gun handler to know what’s in the revolver. Only the bullet in the chamber can’t be seen.
Gun safety requires all parties, including the “armorer” or anyone else handling a firearm to know what they’re doing. It’s not enough to be told the gun is “cold” without performing your own inspection. Hutchins had a one-in-seven chance or 14.28% of getting shot but only if Baldwin pulled the trigger. Practicing a “cross draw” didn’t require Baldwin to pull the trigger, the only way a bullet gets discharged from a handgun. Certainly Gutierrez –Reed bears some responsibility for the film’s prop guns before handing it over to actors on the set. But, ultimately, the buck stops with the one who pulls the trigger, as Baldwin did Oct. 22 when he accidentally shot Hutchins to death. Whatever blame goes around, the Santa Fe County District Attorney has their work cut out to determine criminal liability.
Whether on a movie set or anywhere else, the same gun safety precautions must be met before handling firearms. Whatever Gutierrez-Reed or Hallis did or didn’t do, Baldwin still had the responsibility to determine whether or not the gun was armed-and-dangerous. Told the gun was “cold” is no excuse for anyone picking up a gun, pointing it and pulling the trigger. Using firearms for target practice before the accident can happen anywhere, especially where firearms are shared with others. But whether the gun was used to shoot beer cans or not, the end user, the one that pulls the trigger, must decipher whether or not the gun is loaded. Putting all the blame on the “armorer” makes z zero sense from a gun-safety perspective, where the ultimate responsibility lies with the gun handler, the one that pulls the trigger. Santa Fe authorities can’t dismiss entirely that Baldwin pulled the trigger.
Whether a gun accident takes place on a movie set or anywhere else, the same basic rules of gun safety apply when it comes to accountability. Baldwin can blame the “armoer” or assistant director all he wants but the ultimate responsibility for firearm use falls with the end user, the one who pulls the trigger. Santa Fe authorities have an obligation to charge anyone responsible for the death of another, even when it looks accidental. Unlike a fatality in a car crash, it’s not an entirely random accident when playing with firearms, even when it’s part of a film shoot. Whether Hallis told Balwin the gun was “cold” or not does not absolve Baldwin of culpability, because he should have inspected the handgun himself. Because a revolver shows bullets in the cylinder and chamber, Baldwin had the ultimate responsibility of determining the safety of the firearm, regardless of what anyone told him
