To be honest. I always think of the scene from 'The Prestige' where Bale's character is doing the 'Bullet Catch' trick and of course its a magic trick, but Jackman's character puts a real bullet in the gun?
Could some lunatic have brought in their own bullets from home? And if so, why? To what end?
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
Yeah. Another thread that seemed to die was how exactly did live ammunition show up on set at all? The guy providing the ammo seemed like a bit of a knob too and they didn't search his place for months which seems strange. Arguably as dealer in specific movie arms he should have absolutely ZERO live ammunition anywhere and should be inspecting all of his own inventory. They asked him how it showed up and its just "I dunno". Okay then, moving on.
The understanding I got was that no one really ever took that accusation seriously. If I understood correctly, the provider is well known and widely used, there's no history of there being a problem with them, and there's just nothing to suggest that they had done anything wrong. So that's how that thread leads to nowhere.
I'm thinking it's not also super relevant for the Gutierrez case or the Baldwin case, if there was an issue with the ammo provider, there would be a separate trial against them.
To be honest. I always think of the scene from 'The Prestige' where Bale's character is doing the 'Bullet Catch' trick and of course its a magic trick, but Jackman's character puts a real bullet in the gun?
Could some lunatic have brought in their own bullets from home? And if so, why? To what end?
There are unconfirmed rumors that people used guns from the set to shoot at beer cans for fun, and something like that seems to be by far the most likely explanation.
Just general recklessness, people being stupid, treating guns like toys.
The understanding I got was that no one really ever took that accusation seriously. If I understood correctly, the provider is well known and widely used, there's no history of there being a problem with them, and there's just nothing to suggest that they had done anything wrong. So that's how that thread leads to nowhere.
I'm thinking it's not also super relevant for the Gutierrez case or the Baldwin case, if there was an issue with the ammo provider, there would be a separate trial against them.
Yeah this was my understanding too, it just surprised me the defence didnt target these questions more because it's not about total innocence as much as a reasonable doubt and it seemed like an opportunity to go harder. They did establish it took months to search his place, which seems pretty weird. But ultimately she's supposed to check every piece of ammunition going into the gun so I guess it IS sort of moot. And it's not like she raised concerns about the ammunition status.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
There are unconfirmed rumors that people used guns from the set to shoot at beer cans for fun, and something like that seems to be by far the most likely explanation.
Just general recklessness, people being stupid, treating guns like toys.
Yeah this was also part of the initial rumours. Surprised it didn't come up maybe they didn't find anyone to testify witnessing that.
Yeah this was my understanding too, it just surprised me the defence didnt target these questions more because it's not about total innocence as much as a reasonable doubt and it seemed like an opportunity to go harder. They did establish it took months to search his place, which seems pretty weird. But ultimately she's supposed to check every piece of ammunition going into the gun so I guess it IS sort of moot. And it's not like she raised concerns about the ammunition status.
Yeah this was also part of the initial rumours. Surprised it didn't come up maybe they didn't find anyone to testify witnessing that.
Just speculating, but it could also just be that neither side thought it fit their strategy. For the defense, it doesn't make the safety on set look good, which doesn't make Gutierrez look good. For the prosecution, it was a sidetrack that could have confused the issue of responsibility in the eyes of the jury.
Or something. We'll probably get a book about it eventually.
There are unconfirmed rumors that people used guns from the set to shoot at beer cans for fun, and something like that seems to be by far the most likely explanation.
Just general recklessness, people being stupid, treating guns like toys.
Ya, I heard about the using cans at target practice, between filming. I heard that a day or so after the shooting happened.
There are unconfirmed rumors that people used guns from the set to shoot at beer cans for fun, and something like that seems to be by far the most likely explanation.
Just general recklessness, people being stupid, treating guns like toys.
Then round up those ass clowns post haste!
Because if thats true Baldwin or the Armorer cant frisk every idiot that steps on set.
And then Pistol whip them.
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
I'm no expert on movies or movie sets, but this was always my #1 question.
I mean, you're not really actually shooting anything, why is there live ammunition there at all? What for? It seems dumb to me.
But I ain't no big Hollywood Movie Producer or nuthin.
Wasn't there something about crew taking the guns out to a shooting range? But I agree if it is a movie prop it should never have real bullets anywhere near it.
