[Minnie]

Ran across this, this morning. Written by Stephen Gutowski, founder of The Reload.

Yes, Alec Baldwins Gun Could Have Fired Without Him Pulling The Trigger

In his first major interview since being involved in a fatal shooting on the set of his latest movie, Alec Baldwin made a surprising new claim about his actions that day. Baldwin said the gun went off without him ever actually pulling its trigger.

“Well, the trigger wasn’t pulled,” he told ABC News. “I didn’t pull the trigger.”

At first glance, this sounds far-fetched. It is exceedingly rare for a gun to fire without the trigger being depressed. Modern firearms, even replicas of antique guns, have safeties specifically designed to prevent them from firing without the trigger being pulled. It only really happens when the gun’s firing mechanism is damaged, or there is a significant design flaw. That’s why most gun owners and firearms safety trainers are highly skeptical of any claim a gun just “went off” absent user error.

In Baldwin’s case, though, the claim is at least somewhat more believable. That’s because the gun involved is more prone to firing without the trigger being pulled. And, even though it’s a modern replica of an antique design, it’s possible it did not include modern safety devices. Santa Fe County Sheriff Adan Mendoza identified the gun used in the shooting as a modern Pietta replica of a single-action army revolver. Those guns can be bought either with a transfer bar that makes it impossible for the firing pin to strike the primer unless the trigger is pulled or without one. Often, enthusiasts and collectors prefer the models without modern safety devices because it’s more authentic and perfectly safe when handled properly.

A single-action revolver usually requires the hammer to be manually cocked, and the trigger be pulled for a shot to be fired. That’s why it’s referred to as a single-action: because the trigger performs just one action. It drops the hammer. In a double-action revolver, on the other hand, the trigger can c**k and release the hammer. However, a single-action revolver with the old-style firing mechanism can fire without either the hammer being cocked or the trigger being pulled. When the hammer is down on that kind of revolver, the firing pin protrudes and, if a live round is loaded in the chamber underneath, a sharp enough jolt can cause the pin to strike the round’s primer with enough force to set it off. This is why the “cowboy load” was developed. When carrying an old-style single-action revolver, it’s best practice to leave the chamber underneath the hammer unloaded. That way, a jolt can’t unintentionally set off a round.

None of that means Baldwin’s story is entirely accurate. It’s not clear if drawing a gun from a holster in this state would be enough to set it off. It still seems more plausible Baldwin pulled the trigger. But, the gun firing without the trigger being pulled is not as far-fetched as it sounds at first.Police should be able to determine what kind of firing mechanism the gun in question has and whether it could have fired in the way Baldwin described. However, even if the gun did go off without the trigger being pulled, it doesn’t negate the other negligence that contributed to the deadly shooting.