![Now ya know Alec.... [720x890 - 46KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/ikAcBh.jpg){kind=link}
The press was already trying to spin the story for him by using the passive voice to describe what happened. "...when the gun went off.." words to that effect. As if the weapon was at fault somehow and Baldwin was just an observer to the event.
What I keep coming back to is the multiple shots. Why did he keep firing? One negligent discharge is an "oopsie". Two or more is willful stupidity.
As if the weapon was at fault somehow and Baldwin was just an observer to the event.
Well, I don't think we know what happened yet. If it's a "gun battle sequence" you fire in rapid succession. Also, I think I read it was one bullet that hit two different people, but I don't know.
They were filming a western set in 1880's Kansas, right? Now ask yourself: "What is the most commonly used handgun in a western?"
Answer: A Colt SAA. A single action revolver that must be manually cocked before each time it is fired. Now I don't know what type they were actually using yet. Yes, we know, there were double-action revolvers in existence at the time. But they were not common in 1880's Kansas at that time. So...
Multiple shots from a manually cocked, single-action revolver is not logically classifiable as an "oopsie-daisy". In the time that it would take to re-cock and fire a second shot, what do you think the director who was hit was doing and saying at that moment?
(post is archived)