Alec Baldwin shooting

[GSPHUNTER]

A pistol is a firearm designed to be held with one hand. It is a blanket term that covers flint locks, percussion, revolvers and auto loaders. All revolvers are pistols but not all pistols are revolvers...not to nitpick.

(in comes the guy with the shoulder stock and 20" barrel on his revolver)

edit for reference

An NRA Shooting Sports Journal | Origin Story: The Word “Pistol”

The word “pistol” was in common usage by the 18th century.

www.ssusa.org

When the term was first used in the 15th and 16th century it was as you say but if you look up modern definition you will see there are pistols and there are revolvers. Revolvers have a revolving cylinder and a new round is revolved in line with the barrel either by cocking the hammer or pulling the trigger depending on single action or double action. A semi-auto pistol Differs from a revolver in that it relies on the force of the slide to cycle a new round into the chamber. Pistols also have a replaceable magazine. I 100% disagree all revolvers are not pistols. But both are now classified as handguns. To solve this, in the next few days walk into a gun store and tell the guy you are looking into a new handgun and you would like to look at a few different pistols. See what he shows you.

 

[SWOHTR]

Remember, he had a choice to pull that trigger.

 

[Billy Goat]

I don't care to weigh in on any of it, let more of the facts come out instead of hearsay that is hopefully leaked and not made up.


However it's my understanding that the dummy rounds that are loaded to look like "live ammo" have a BB in them so when they are shaken they rattle.

That's how shaking the ammo you can tell, tho that might not be 100% correct and still seems like a poor way to determine.

Exit: somehow auto correct made "of it" into "dude"

 

[GSPHUNTER]

I don't care to weigh in on any dude, let more of the facts come out instead of hearsay that is hopefully leaked and not made up.


However it's my understanding that the dummy rounds that are loaded to look like "live ammo" have a BB in them so when they are shaken they rattle.

That's how shaking the ammo you can tell, tho that might not be 100% correct and still seems like a poor way to determine.

I have heard that but I have rounds that look like live ammo, .223, and they don't have BB's in them, I don't know if maybe the term dummy rounds would be applied to what I have or if they are just considered imitations of actual rounds.

 

[Billy Goat]

I have heard that but I have rounds that look like live ammo, .223, and they don't have BB's in them, I don't know if maybe the term dummy rounds would be applied to what I have or if they are just considered imitations of actual rounds.

I like to think there's some sort of industry standard for things in the film industry. I suspect I'd be woefully unimpressed to know what they actually are.


I can't believe that a prop gun wouldn't have atleast a bushing installed in the chamber to prevent live loads from being chambered. Seems easy enough, just to turn something down to fit in the chamber, but that is still open to allow gasses to vent.

Then prop guns that are used for loading live looking dummy rounds would have the firing pin and springs removed, could likely have the whole trigger assembly removed.

Maybe it's a miracle more people haven't been killed.

 

[Wapiti66]

The choke me so called armorer is definitely responsible, as is the person who chokes her, I mean hired her…. As for AB, also responsible, let’s hope his next film will have him in a scene playing Russian roulette. He will never be held accountable as he is on the “right” side of those that have the power. He is scum as is most of Hollywood, and they all band together and protect each other as this thread has proven.

When a wacko goes on a shooting rampage and kills people we are told this is the NRAs fault and could be prevented if we outlawed guns. So, when a wacko (AB) is filming a movie and “accidentally” kills someone, can we assume this could have all been prevented if we outlawed filming movies? Just a thought, and I’ll admit a shallow one, but it matches the mentality of the Hollywood elites and their anti gun rants.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

The choke me so called armorer is definitely responsible, as is the person who chokes her, I mean hired her…. As for AB, also responsible, let’s hope his next film will have him in a scene playing Russian roulette. He will never be held accountable as he is on the “right” side of those that have the power. He is scum as is most of Hollywood, and they all band together and protect each other as this thread has proven.

When a wacko goes on a shooting rampage and kills people we are told this is the NRAs fault and could be prevented if we outlawed guns. So, when a wacko (AB) is filming a movie and “accidentally” kills someone, can we assume this could have all been prevented if we outlawed filming movies? Just a thought, and I’ll admit a shallow one, but it matches the mentality of the Hollywood elites and their anti gun rants.

With currently over 20,000 gun laws on the books, is one more going to help. What needs to be done is enforce the ones already there. But the problem is, those who want more feel good laws are the same ones who think the punishment for firearm crimes are too harsh. Criminals don't deserve prison time they need understanding and compassion for what society has turn them into. Pure Libtard BS.

 

[mflo]

Again, talking out of my ass here because I don't know the specifics of what happened on this particular set, but from what I know and have experienced so far in my career, I think this accident happened because there was a failure somewhere in the chain of custody of the Dummy rounds... from the time they were made by a prop house (more than likely by an experienced armorer) and traveled to set, and into the prop gun.

Again, this is going to fall onto the armorer, and the 1st AD. Clearly, normal and longstanding established protocol was violated, resulting in this tragic accident. Whomever brought live rounds to set will bear responsibility, along with the armorer and the 1st AD. But in all likelihood, it was the armorer herself that mixed up live ammo with the dummy rounds.

The stories of crew plinking with the prop guns (or their own personal firearms) are absolutely mind-boggling to me, for many reasons. I have a hard time believing that went down in any way, but if it's true, it's another colossal failure by the armorer and the producers to let that happen anywhere near set. This story will probably turn out to be bullshit driven by the media - but if not, it's mind blowing.

I have another scenario to propose all of the people that are saying Alec is solely at fault since he pulled the trigger. Imagine for a moment that you have a kid. A young kid, say 11 years old. Say you're at the range with your kid, and you want to teach them safe firearm handling, and you let them fire a pistol downrange. What happens if your kid discharges that pistol and somehow kills someone? Does your kid go down for Murder, or Manslaughter? Or do you as the parent? Or perhaps the RSO? That's the way this will play out in the investigation, because film sets are not the same as the real world when it comes to this type of thing - the responsibility falls on the professional firearms expert, aka the armorer - whom in this case would be the Parent and the RSO all rolled into one. Even though he is an adult, similar logic to him being a child will apply. As an experienced actor, I'm positive he would have been operating under the assumption that there would never be actual live cartidges anywhere near set, let alone loaded into the revolver he was handed. Again, the typical rules of gun safety go out the window on a film set - because for the most part, they can't be adhered to.

Also, as an aside, there are usually law enforcement officers present on film sets when production is happening on location (actual police / sherriffs / highway patrol) and whenever simulated gunfire is going on outside of a stage. They act as security for the set, maintain traffic barricades / road closures, as well as letting the average person who happens upon a location shoot and hears gunfire that everything is on the up and up. This is typically mandatory per the permits granting permission for film production to happen (but maybe not in NM?).

 

[GSPHUNTER]

I have not watched it but there is or was a TV program about US Navy Seals. I heard there were actual retired Seals on the set assisting with firearm safety. I don't think it much better than that.

 

[mflo]

These would be considered "Technical Advisors" on set. Usually there to make sure that the actors are performing in a way that would be consistent with how SEALs might actually act in the real world. All the firearms related stuff would still be the responsibility of the armorer, although you can be damn sure that when TA's like that are on set that the armorer is hanging out with them.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

These would be considered "Technical Advisors" on set. Usually there to make sure that the actors are performing in a way that would be consistent with how SEALs might actually act in the real world. All the firearms related stuff would still be the responsibility of the armorer, although you can be damn sure that when TA's like that are on set that the armorer is hanging out with them.

Thanks for pointing out their responsibilities on the set. Ya those men know firearms like few others. I Know if I were an armorer, I would be picking their brains.

 

[4fletch]

When the term was first used in the 15th and 16th century it was as you say but if you look up modern definition you will see there are pistols and there are revolvers. Revolvers have a revolving cylinder and a new round is revolved in line with the barrel either by cocking the hammer or pulling the trigger depending on single action or double action. A semi-auto pistol Differs from a revolver in that it relies on the force of the slide to cycle a new round into the chamber. Pistols also have a replaceable magazine. I 100% disagree all revolvers are not pistols. But both are now classified as handguns. To solve this, in the next few days walk into a gun store and tell the guy you are looking into a new handgun and you would like to look at a few different pistols. See what he shows you.

The modern definition is no different than the old one, as i said it is a blanket term. There are just more variations. The NRA, the ATF, and everyone under the sun still use pistol to cover all handguns. You are exactly as right or wrong as anyone who tries to claim the definition of a word has changed midstream while it is still in circulation under the first definition.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

The modern definition is no different than the old one, as i said it is a blanket term. There are just more variations. The NRA, the ATF, and everyone under the sun still use pistol to cover all handguns. You are exactly as right or wrong as anyone who tries to claim the definition of a word has changed midstream while it is still in circulation under the first definition.

Yes pistol is a generic term used for all handguns. like I said go to a gun store.

 

[4fletch]

Yes pistol is a generic term used for all handguns. like I said go to a gun store.

Thanks for admitting i was correct and you were being pedantic. Sorry about your brothers leg, all the comps i have seen they now use wax bullets. Im assuming because it is insanely risky to draw, aim and fan a hammer from the hip as fast as you can.

 

[GSPHUNTER]

Thanks for admitting i was correct and you were being pedantic. Sorry about your brothers leg, all the comps i have seen they now use wax bullets. Im assuming because it is insanely risky to draw, aim and fan a hammer from the hip as fast as you can.

Thanks for admitting i was correct and you were being pedantic. Sorry about your brothers leg, all the comps i have seen they now use wax bullets. Im assuming because it is insanely risky to draw, aim and fan a hammer from the hip as fast as you can.

I said it's a generic term for all all hand guns. But technically a revolver is NOT a pistol in modern terminology. Once again go into a gun store and tell them you want to see a pistol, they will hand you a semi-auto. then go into another store and ask to see a revolver, they will not show you a semi-auto. But you are entitled to be mistaken.

 

[4fletch]

All revolvers are pistols. All pistols are handguns. All handguns are pistols. Not all pistols are revolvers. You are just digging a hole. This is not a cartridge vs shell debate. Pistol is an accepted and widely used term that by definition is correct. By legal definition it is correct. It is technically correct, and that is the best kind of correct.
The word handgun is literally the definition of pistol. Sure people use the terms flint lock, autoloader, semi, revolver, single and double action to specify differences, that specificity however does not negate the correctness of the use pistol for any of them.
If you walk into a gun shop and ask for a pistol i would hope the guy behind the counter would let out a sigh, then slowly and annoyed ask you what it is for. Anything less and you should find a new shop.

 

[*zap*]

I wood luv 2 c baldwin locked way........

 

[GSPHUNTER]

All revolvers are pistols. All pistols are handguns. All handguns are pistols. Not all pistols are revolvers. You are just digging a hole. This is not a cartridge vs shell debate. Pistol is an accepted and widely used term that by definition is correct. By legal definition it is correct. It is technically correct, and that is the best kind of correct.
The word handgun is literally the definition of pistol. Sure people use the terms flint lock, autoloader, semi, revolver, single and double action to specify differences, that specificity however does not negate the correctness of the use pistol for any of them.
If you walk into a gun shop and ask for a pistol i would hope the guy behind the counter would let out a sigh, then slowly and annoyed ask you what it is for. Anything less and you should find a new shop.

If I walked into a gun store and specially asked to see their line of pistols and he showed me revolvers, I would say, I said pistols as in semi-autos, not revolvers.

 

[String&stick]

Two guys walked into a bar. . .
One drew a pistol and the other drew a revolver. Both traded handgun pictures and left!

My joke/story is about as big of a waste of time as the two of you arguing over pistols, revolvers, and handguns! Start a poll in another thread and let Rokslide determine the winner.

But both have to agree that the loser buys a chicken suit and post actual hunting photos while wearing said suit next year!

It's the only want to end the argument!!!

 

[RS_Non-Res]

Nobody is talking about the difference between criminal and civil violations. Like OJ.

I'm pretty sure that AB is guilty of New Mexico's "involuntary manslaughter" and could easily be convicted (penalties is another story). No one else is guilty of that crime.

On the other hand, the failure of cast, crew, and management of that particular production to follow basic and universal firearms safety protocols, well established movie industry standards for firearms safety on the set, and staffing standards, reeks of high-dollar settlement in a civil suit.